The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than ISIS

[Poster]

Know that even that criminal al-Maliki - may Allah ta'ala give him what he deserves! - used ISI in 2014 (which had mutated into ISIL at that time) for his own goals! He himself told his soldiers to leave Mosul to a small number of ISIL fighters (and this is something that everyone in 'Iraq knows!) and this was in order to stop the protests against oppression in the Sunni regions and in order to be able to bomb the 'Iraqi Sunni cities later on and make demographic changes! And this is exactley what happened later on.

Today we have an 'Iraq where the North is almost ruled independetely of the rest and where the people have not received their full salaries since 2014 (this month they're receiving it for the first time fully again!), the regions in the middle have been heavily bombarded and many people can still not return to their homes and many regions in the South (especially Basra) have not even clean water or electricity.

And then some youngsters living in the West - who basically have no idea of classical Islam whatsoever!!! - are trying to tell us how great these "Salafi" groups are. We ask Allah ta'ala for well-being!

The bit in bold is what's known as hindsight bias. If this was al-Maliki's plan he would've tried to at least contain them. What happened after that was an existential crisis for the Iraqi government.

[Abu Sulayman]

The bit in bold is what's known as hindsight bias. If this was al-Maliki's plan he would've tried to at least contain them. What happened after that was an existential crisis for the Iraqi government.

There is no hindsight bias involved here. What you say would be true, if I were to claim that al-Maliki and ISI/ISIL planned this together. This is however not what I said.

What I said is that al-Maliki commanded the leaders of the army to retreat from Mosul. Know that the soldiers were asked why they "deserted

[Poster]

There is no hindsight bias involved here. What you say would be true, if I were to claim that al-Maliki and ISI/ISIL planned this together. This is however not what I said.

What I said is that al-Maliki commanded the leaders of the army to retreat from Mosul. Know that the soldiers were asked why they "desertedbut had received commands from their leadership to retreat. Guess whose command the army leaders had to follow at that time? Al-Maliki! What a surprise!

If this was the case thousands of Iraqi government fighters wouldn't have been massacred. It would've been a retreat to allow ISIS into Mosul and then containing them there, right?

There was not a single reason to leave a whole city. So why did leaders of the army call their soldiers to retreat from the city?
Al-Maliki wanted to stop the protests in Sunni regions. So he did what he did with the intention that ISI/ISIL will control the city and the the regions around it and this will give him the right to attack these regions and change the balance of power and make demographic changes. This is exactly what happened later on.

It wasn't just the regions around Mosul though. They were in the Salahudeen governorate and were advancing on Diyala / Baghdad.

If you were to ask me, the protests in Sunni regions allowed the dawaesh to capture Mosul but I don't believe it was Maliki's plan to let the city fall to them. Wallahu a'lam.

[Muslim First]

I believe Abu Sulayman lives in Iraq currently. Is that true bro?

[Pakisaurus]

Struck with defeatism some people believe kuffar are in control of everything so when the believers make gains against kuffar and their armies flee in terror, barely hanging on to their underwears, the defeated ones see this not a victory for believers but part of kafirs well planned strategy. Dogs like Maliki and those before him and those after him, have no such control or strategy.

[Abu Sulayman]

If this was the case thousands of Iraqi government fighters wouldn't have been massacred. It would've been a retreat to allow ISIS into Mosul and then containing them there, right?




It wasn't just the regions around Mosul though. They were in the Salahudeen governorate and were advancing on Diyala / Baghdad.

If you were to ask me, the protests in Sunni regions allowed the dawaesh to capture Mosul but I don't believe it was Maliki's plan to let the city fall to them. Wallahu a'lam.

[Abu Sulayman]

Struck with defeatism some people believe kuffar are in control of everything so when the believers make gains against kuffar and their armies flee in terror, barely hanging on to their underwears, the defeated ones see this not a victory for believers but part of kafirs well planned strategy. Dogs like Maliki and those before him and those after him, have no such control or strategy.

[Muslim First]

I remember this same type of thread on Islamicawakening, and the students of knowledge on that forum started to dissect the Najdi dawah. And these were individuals who used to be upon it, it was a real eye opener for me. That thread was a little more academic because you didn't have Aqeedah being thrown into the mix. Just sticking on topic for the most part, this thread is good bro. I think it's too convenient that the Ottomans were mushriks and, Ibn Abdul Wahhab was the only one on the truth, clearly his works had extremism within and when it's used to make takfir and shed blood I think that's something we should stay away from. Supporting Daesh is easy when you live in the west, we're not the ones losing friends and family members, nor do we face the hardships after the group gets defeated.

[Stoic Believer]

I remember this same type of thread on Islamicawakening, and the students of knowledge on that forum started to dissect the Najdi dawah. And these were individuals who used to be upon it, it was a real eye opener for me. That thread was a little more academic because you didn't have Aqeedah being thrown into the mix. Just sticking on topic for the most part, this thread is good bro. I think it's too convenient that the Ottomans were mushriks and, Ibn Abdul Wahhab was the only one on the truth, clearly his works had extremism within and when it's used to make takfir and shed blood I think that's something we should stay away from. Supporting Daesh is easy when you live in the west, we're not the ones losing friends and family members, nor do we face the hardships after the group gets defeated.

I would have loved to have read that thread. I have yet to see a truly academic, impartial discussion on the Najdi dawah that doesn't ultimately descend into polemics.

[Pakisaurus]

Throwing tantrums and derogatory labels doesn't do you any good.

Maliki is a dog to you because he abandoned Mosul and "allowed" muslims to take over. You wanted American trained soliders to resist muslims so peace under kufr rule can be maintained and defeat those who aspire to establish Islam in the land.

This is why Sufis have no role in Jihad today. They are in the corner of actual enemies of Allah. Not only have they abandoned Jihad they also give rubbish fatwas declaring Muslims as Khawarij, making their blood halal, to supplement the kuffar as they go on murder spree.

The kuffar and their stooges are responsible of war and destruction. Shifting the blame of their oppression on other muslims is tactic of hypocrites. What is your problem with muslims in the west? The movements in Iraq and elsewhere are predominantly supported by locals and muslims in bordering countries.

[Pakisaurus]

I remember this same type of thread on Islamicawakening, and the students of knowledge on that forum started to dissect the Najdi dawah. And these were individuals who used to be upon it, it was a real eye opener for me. That thread was a little more academic because you didn't have Aqeedah being thrown into the mix. Just sticking on topic for the most part, this thread is good bro. I think it's too convenient that the Ottomans were mushriks and, Ibn Abdul Wahhab was the only one on the truth, clearly his works had extremism within and when it's used to make takfir and shed blood I think that's something we should stay away from. Supporting Daesh is easy when you live in the west, we're not the ones losing friends and family members, nor do we face the hardships after the group gets defeated.

Same can be said about any group/struggle including the struggle that the individual in your signature belonged to, so makes no sense to single out one group here.

[Abu Sulayman]

Throwing tantrums and derogatory labels doesn't do you any good.

Maliki is a dog to you because he abandoned Mosul and "allowed" muslims to take over. You wanted American trained soliders to resist muslims so peace under kufr rule can be maintained and defeat those who aspire to establish Islam in the land.

This is why Sufis have no role in Jihad today. They are in the corner of actual enemies of Allah. Not only have they abandoned Jihad they also give rubbish fatwas declaring Muslims as Khawarij, making their blood halal, to supplement the kuffar as they go on murder spree.

The kuffar and their stooges are responsible of war and destruction. Shifting the blame of their oppression on other muslims is tactic of hypocrites. What is your problem with muslims in the west? The movements in Iraq and elsewhere are predominantly supported by locals and muslims in bordering countries.

[Abu Sulayman]

Same can be said about any group/struggle including the struggle that the individual in your signature belonged to, so makes no sense to single out one group here.

[Poster]

- The aim was not simply Mosul, but the Arab Sunni regions in general

Allah knows best. What ended up happening however was the dawaesh pushing way further south than anyone anticipated.

[/QUOTE]

If I'm not mistaken the KDP wanted to defend Kirkuk but the PUK were a trojan horse who betrayed them when the battle began. How does that apply to Mosul? Who was the trojan horse in this case?

- The soldiers who retreated from Mosul clearly said that they had received orders from above to do so.

This is true.

It wasn't an orderly retreat by any stretch of the imagination. It was literally carbomb after carbomb.

[Poster]

Allahu yahdeek.

The same Buti who compared the SAA with the sahaba. May Allah give him what he deserves.