Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The Russians Will Decimate ISIS. Russians Will Take No Prisoners. [View all]leveymg
(36,418 posts)79. Every word is based in documented facts and reliable sources. I'll leave "the truth" to you and Fox
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026192755
Proposed UN Sanctions Do Not Go To Most ISIS Funding from Wealthy Donors
There is broad agreement that "substantial" funds are still reaching ISIS from wealthy elites in Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other Gulf states. As the Pentagon announced yesterday, oil exports now do not account for most of ISIS finances. ISIS is instead depending on donations, a lot of donations, according to Rear Admiral John Kirby, spokesman for the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Further sanctions do not threaten the primary source of finance for the so-called Islamic State (IS), reported to be in excess of $2 billion last year. On Thursday, a UN measure was proposed by Russia that would sanction the trade in oil and stolen antiquities that partially funds ISIS funders. However, according to the NYT, it does not add to the existing list of individuals named for sanctions. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/07/world/middleeast/un-prepares-resolution-to-confront-islamic-state-on-oil-and-antiquities.html?_r=0
This spares the US and NATO the difficult task of having to immediately punish most of the same Sunni states with which it has been previously cooperating in prosecuting the war in Syria. The measure discussed on Friday would, however, specifically sanction parties engaged in smuggling oil from ISIS controlled areas, paying ransom, and the sale of stolen antiquities, the latter valued at $35 million last year.
Nobody seems to want to put a finger on exactly how much cash is still flowing to ISIS from wealthy ISIS funders, and who exactly they are. But, everyone agrees that support from the Saudis and Gulf elites continues to be substantial. See, http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/isis-terror/whos-funding-isis-wealthy-gulf-angel-investors-officials-say-n208006
In 2014, Saudi Arabia publicly agreed to clamp down on some donations from its citizens and religious foundations. As a result, most private funding now goes through Qatar. The UN Security Council Resolution 2170 passed last August 15 named only six individual ISIS leaders for direct sanctions. The new measure does not expand that list, but calls for a committee to nominate others for violation of existing UN resolutions.
The effects of the additional sanctions on oil exports proposed would have its primary impact on crude oil smuggling in and out of Turkey. The majority of ISIS oil revenues are derived through the black market in that country. Last June, at its height, a Turkish opposition MP and other sources estimated the annual oil revenues at $800 million. http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/221272-report-isis-oil-production-worth-800m-per-year
If accurate, oil sales was about 40% of the total ISIS operating budget as stated by the group. However, even at its height, petroleum accounted for only a fraction of ISIS funding. Some western estimates placed the IS annual total budget as high as $3 billion. See, http://thehill.com/policy/defense/228465-isis-puts-payments-to-poor-disabled-in-2-billion-budget; http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/isis-news-caliphate-unveils-first-annual-budget-2bn-250m-surplus-war-chest-1481931
The $800 million figure is actually at the top end of the estimates. US sources quoted by CNN last October stated that ISIS oil income was more likely half that figure: http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/06/world/meast/isis-funding/
Along with everyone else, the returns on ISIS oil are probably a fraction of what they were at the height of world oil prices a year ago. Plus, the US and allies are bombing the group's oil platforms and vehicles. That has cut production and export to the point where US commanders now acknowledged that oil sales aren't the source of most ISIS funds, and that they are coming from donations, "a lot of donations":
That leaves a big hole in the Caliphate's budget - that gets filled by someone.
Imposition of expanded UN sanctions would entail difficulties and costs for the US, particularly with Saudi Arabia. Therefore, it should not come as a surprise that the Security Counsel measure is limited, and does not yet show if the world is truly serious about eradicating ISIS.
Proposed UN Sanctions Do Not Go To Most ISIS Funding from Wealthy Donors
There is broad agreement that "substantial" funds are still reaching ISIS from wealthy elites in Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other Gulf states. As the Pentagon announced yesterday, oil exports now do not account for most of ISIS finances. ISIS is instead depending on donations, a lot of donations, according to Rear Admiral John Kirby, spokesman for the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Further sanctions do not threaten the primary source of finance for the so-called Islamic State (IS), reported to be in excess of $2 billion last year. On Thursday, a UN measure was proposed by Russia that would sanction the trade in oil and stolen antiquities that partially funds ISIS funders. However, according to the NYT, it does not add to the existing list of individuals named for sanctions. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/07/world/middleeast/un-prepares-resolution-to-confront-islamic-state-on-oil-and-antiquities.html?_r=0
This spares the US and NATO the difficult task of having to immediately punish most of the same Sunni states with which it has been previously cooperating in prosecuting the war in Syria. The measure discussed on Friday would, however, specifically sanction parties engaged in smuggling oil from ISIS controlled areas, paying ransom, and the sale of stolen antiquities, the latter valued at $35 million last year.
Nobody seems to want to put a finger on exactly how much cash is still flowing to ISIS from wealthy ISIS funders, and who exactly they are. But, everyone agrees that support from the Saudis and Gulf elites continues to be substantial. See, http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/isis-terror/whos-funding-isis-wealthy-gulf-angel-investors-officials-say-n208006
In 2014, Saudi Arabia publicly agreed to clamp down on some donations from its citizens and religious foundations. As a result, most private funding now goes through Qatar. The UN Security Council Resolution 2170 passed last August 15 named only six individual ISIS leaders for direct sanctions. The new measure does not expand that list, but calls for a committee to nominate others for violation of existing UN resolutions.
The effects of the additional sanctions on oil exports proposed would have its primary impact on crude oil smuggling in and out of Turkey. The majority of ISIS oil revenues are derived through the black market in that country. Last June, at its height, a Turkish opposition MP and other sources estimated the annual oil revenues at $800 million. http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/221272-report-isis-oil-production-worth-800m-per-year
If accurate, oil sales was about 40% of the total ISIS operating budget as stated by the group. However, even at its height, petroleum accounted for only a fraction of ISIS funding. Some western estimates placed the IS annual total budget as high as $3 billion. See, http://thehill.com/policy/defense/228465-isis-puts-payments-to-poor-disabled-in-2-billion-budget; http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/isis-news-caliphate-unveils-first-annual-budget-2bn-250m-surplus-war-chest-1481931
The $800 million figure is actually at the top end of the estimates. US sources quoted by CNN last October stated that ISIS oil income was more likely half that figure: http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/06/world/meast/isis-funding/
The U.S. Treasury Department does not have hard figures that it can make public on the group's wealth but says it believes ISIS takes in millions of dollars a month.
Sources familiar with the subject say that ISIS' "burn' rate" -- how much the group spends -- is huge, including salaries, weapons and other expenses. For ISIS' oil sales, sources told CNN, the group probably makes between $1 million and $2 million per day, but probably on the lower end.
Sources familiar with the subject say that ISIS' "burn' rate" -- how much the group spends -- is huge, including salaries, weapons and other expenses. For ISIS' oil sales, sources told CNN, the group probably makes between $1 million and $2 million per day, but probably on the lower end.
Along with everyone else, the returns on ISIS oil are probably a fraction of what they were at the height of world oil prices a year ago. Plus, the US and allies are bombing the group's oil platforms and vehicles. That has cut production and export to the point where US commanders now acknowledged that oil sales aren't the source of most ISIS funds, and that they are coming from donations, "a lot of donations":
The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) is no longer relying on oil as its main source of revenue to fund its terrorist activity, according to the Pentagon.
We know that oil revenue is no longer the lead source of their income in dollars, Pentagon spokesperson Rear Admiral John Kirby told reporters during a press briefing on Tuesday.
ISIS loss of income is compounded by its losses on the battlefield as the group has lost literally hundreds and hundreds of vehicles that they cant replace, Kirby said.
Theyve got to steal whatever they want to get, and theres a finite number.
ISIS is instead depending on a lot of donations as one of the main sources of income. They also have a significant black market program going on, Kirby said.
http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2015/02/05/Pentagon-oil-is-no-longer-ISIS-main-source-of-income-.html
We know that oil revenue is no longer the lead source of their income in dollars, Pentagon spokesperson Rear Admiral John Kirby told reporters during a press briefing on Tuesday.
ISIS loss of income is compounded by its losses on the battlefield as the group has lost literally hundreds and hundreds of vehicles that they cant replace, Kirby said.
Theyve got to steal whatever they want to get, and theres a finite number.
ISIS is instead depending on a lot of donations as one of the main sources of income. They also have a significant black market program going on, Kirby said.
That leaves a big hole in the Caliphate's budget - that gets filled by someone.
Imposition of expanded UN sanctions would entail difficulties and costs for the US, particularly with Saudi Arabia. Therefore, it should not come as a surprise that the Security Counsel measure is limited, and does not yet show if the world is truly serious about eradicating ISIS.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
97 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
The Russians Will Decimate ISIS. Russians Will Take No Prisoners. [View all]
TheMastersNemesis
Oct 2015
OP
No, I believe that person is sick at your attempts to make a brutal dictator look cuddly
stevenleser
Oct 2015
#40
If Putin were really serious he'd drone the financial backers as well...nt
Jesus Malverde
Oct 2015
#61
I agree. I just won't celebrate Putin's part in it. He's in this to restore the USSR.
randome
Oct 2015
#96
I agree they will be brutal, I disagree they will be particularly effective against ISIS.
stevenleser
Oct 2015
#5
Yes and no. Yes the west are not funding them, but no because ISIS is cash rich.
stevenleser
Oct 2015
#20
We've done more than that. We worked with the UN to pass resolutions to make anyone
stevenleser
Oct 2015
#41
Every word is based in documented facts and reliable sources. I'll leave "the truth" to you and Fox
leveymg
Oct 2015
#79
As are mine. There are many more links that back up the businessweek version. Nt
stevenleser
Oct 2015
#84
On this, the Joint Chiefs have more crediblity than a Saudi apologist working for a neocon thinktank
leveymg
Oct 2015
#86
We've been their longer supposedly fighting a weaker foe so rah fucking rah.
TheKentuckian
Oct 2015
#49
It pretty much is at this point. It's a mess of competing rebel groups and religious groups
stevenleser
Oct 2015
#64
Possibly. Depends how ISIS reacts. If they melt into the various cities they took and
stevenleser
Oct 2015
#21
High explosives have been "raining down on their asses" for the past 2-3 months
stevenleser
Oct 2015
#70
You are aware that 75% of the "coalition" flights weren't dropping their bombs.
Jesus Malverde
Oct 2015
#72
Depends on how it goes. Lots of civilian losses and destruction tend to harden
TwilightGardener
Oct 2015
#12
Brutality in a guerrilla war is usually a recipe for defeat (of the Russians, in this case)
NickB79
Oct 2015
#23
Recruits won't just be coming from the Arab states but from all Islamic countries
snagglepuss
Oct 2015
#59
I wouldn't make the mistake of assuming the Russian army is any more or less brutal than ours.
Maedhros
Oct 2015
#27
It Was During The Iran Crisis. The Iranians Took A Russian National ( A Diplomat I Think)
TheMastersNemesis
Oct 2015
#87
I have to admit i was naive in my thinking on this. I thought Putin was going
hrmjustin
Oct 2015
#53
russians got their asses handed to them in Chechnya. their military isn't any better now.
KG
Oct 2015
#60