Nor what the Iraqi army did in Kuwait. Both instances are well documented.
The point here is that this "ISIS" which supposedly hates Iran and Iranians more than anybody else yet hardly ever mentions them nor attacks them, is supposedly a proxy of Saudi Arabia/GCC/Arab nations/Turkey/West etc. What a wonderful proxy that never attacks your supposed enemy but your own interests in the region and your own self! Brilliant theory!
Did your pull that "statistic" out of your hairy ***** *** or what? Or did you inject too much opium today? It is obvious that you are a Farsi so I am not sure why you are using the Afghan flag.
You forgot that most of your leadership, that came to power thanks to Baba America, are more loyal to the Mullah's in Iran than their own country. Many speak about this openly (WIlayat al-Faqih) and not only that during the Iraq-Iran war many thought with Iran against their own countrymen.
And what exactly was the nature of that "aid"? A few advisers etc. that changed nothing on the ground. Similar to how the Mullah's claimed to have "saved" 12 million big Baghdad from at most 10.000 ISIS members. Another good joke.
If the Mullah's are such good friends of yours why don't they return the planes, military equipment etc. that they stole from Iraq and which could have been used ages ago? Why don't they host any Iraqi refugees? Why are there more Iraqis in UAE alone since 2003?
I do not think that any regional countries were telling the US anything as the US does not need to listen to any regional country.
Anyway yet another confirmation of what we all knew.
Iranians have the highest number of heroin addicts in the world and every Tom, Dick and Harry is able to smuggle drugs into Iran, barefooted Baloch militants are crossing the Iranian-Pakistani border on a weekly basis, Kurds from Iraq are crossing into Iran freely etc. yet we are all to believe that the only reason why Iran has not been attacked by ISIS is due to their strong internal security. Despite ISIS being next door.
As for not having "ISIS members within them", there have been at least 200 Iranians (Iranian Kurds alone mind you) fighting for ISIS. A few dozen suicide bombers included. All of which can be documented by a few Google searches.
Recently we saw some anti-terror operation being published by the Mullah's of supposed ISIS cells however it looked so staged that hardly anyone outside of Iran took it for granted.
ISIS can attack the most powerful regional countries let alone nations in the world (Western powers) etc. but not "mighty Iran". That is something only the 1000's upon 1000's of drug smugglers, Kurds, Baloch etc. can do.
Not only that ISIS has been a blessing for Iran in every way and shape that you can look at it. Similar to how Al-Assad freed all jailed Islamists and allowed much of his opposition to be dominated by certain groups. Permitting ISIS to kill FSA members etc. Buying oil from ISIS etc.
ISIS suddenly appearing in Syria meant the delegitimization of the Syrian opposition globally and served the interests of Al-Assad perfectly. Similar to how an ISIS insurgency benefits many Iraqi politicians in power (Sunni as Shia) etc. Removes focus from their horrible job at running the country and actually offering people services. For once unites people too and gives a bigger say to Shia militants and their allied political groups.
Not to say that ISIS is basically an local creation and a mixture of Ba'athism (the entire leadership is made up by former Iraqi Baathists - a dead ideology) and a mixture of Jihadism which serves well to get recruits. KSA never had good ties with the Baathists and they threatened Arab monarchism as "Arab nationalists" and now they are doing it under the disguise of Islamists.
Essentially it is a power struggle between Iraqi Sunni Arabs (a significant portion of them) and Iraqi Shia Arabs.
This is why initially you had Iraqi Sunni Sufi Groups, tribal groups in Anbar, Ninawa, Diyala, Salah-ad-Din etc., mainstream politicians (Nujaifi, Jabouri, Issawi, Abu Risha etc. - none of them can be called ISIS followers or believers in their ideology), Ad-Douris groups etc. supporting the revolts back in 2012 and 2013 (before too) and the opposition against the Baghdad regime led then by Al-Maliki. All those groups joined hands until ISIS wanted a monopoly and started targeting those former "allies". They were not really allies but they both did not want to be ruled by Al-Malikis regime and de facto the Mullah's in Iran and their henchmen/puppets in Iraq.
And to think that this will suddenly change should ISIS return to sleeper cells or until another group emerges, is wishful thinking and I honestly don't blame the average Iraqi Sunni Arab living in Ninawa, Anbar, Salah ad-Din, Diyala, Kirkuk, Babil etc. for not wanting to live under such an regime. Unless of course the unimaginable happens and the corrupt, incompetent etc. Iraqi politicians begin to serve their people and country and the loyal puppets of Iran/Mullah's become more loyal to their country rather than foreigners. The list is very long and none of this seems likely in the nearby future.
Now they are "celebrating" the slow capture of a 1.5 million big city that was captured by less than 10.000 ISIS members (vast majority local members to make it even more embarrassing) and which should never have been captured to begin with if those people in power were so great as some claim.
Funnily enough both of those parties (Iraqi Ba'athists aka ISIS) are twins if not at least siblings. Along with a third group (Al-Assad aka Syrian Ba'athists). Talk about a bad comedy gone wrong.
Another hilarious thing is Syrian Ba'athist's (led by Alawis - not even Shias) are great but Iraqi Ba'athist's (mostly Sunnis) are bad despite there not being any difference in politics or actions.
Islamists ruling the "Islamic" "Republic" of Iran is great but Islamists (read Sunnis) ruling elsewhere is bad.
When you think about it both ISIS and the "Islamic" "Republic" of Iran are two sides of the same coin foreign policy wise. One is trying to spread their version of Islamism (Wilayat al-Faqih) and the other (ISIS) their own perverted version. Both despise Arab monarchies and consider them their foremost enemies. Funny, is it not?
Even funnier when both of those terrorist groups policies are doing nothing but damage the Arab world and Arab countries which is the end goal of both. One due to ancient rivalries the other due to chaos being needed for them to exist in the first place. Both hate mainstream Sunni Islam too and want to undermine it.
Similar to how the Iranian Mullah's want to undermine the traditional way of understanding Zaydism in Northern Yemen (through using proxies such as Houthis and sending their leaders to Iran in order to be influenced by the cancerous Wilayat al-Faqih) and the Iraqi Shia Arab traditional view of Twelver Islam as understood by the Iraqi Arab hawza in Najaf and Karbala. This power struggle is ongoing currently and many Iraqi Shia clerics speak about it openly.
One of them spoke about it as far back as pre-2003.
Former Hezbollah member (leading member) talking about the exact same thing.
We Arabs know our enemies well and their plots. Maybe outsiders will be fooled but eventually the ant will be crushed and we are well prepared.
Of course dumb and blind sheep will never change. Too bad when it is their countries that suffer the most from this cancer (Iraq, Lebanon, Syria and now Yemen too). At one period in time you reach a limit where you say/conclude; "we want the best for you, but if you are unable to help yourself first there is little we can do". I have reached this conclusion but time will once again prove me right as it has done so many times before on so many different issues. 1979 was indeed a bad year that gave rise to two cancers
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Revolution
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Mosque_seizure
of whose descendants we are still fighting to this very day.
Any sane person that understands this region, its history, historical rivalries, internal rivalries and the ground realties can make his own conclusions. I especially appeal to the non-Muslim and Western readers here. Read my post, investigate everything that I wrote which is factual and based on facts (you can yourself check this) and connect the dots.
Ask yourself which regimes, groups, states etc. benefit the most from those actions that I have described. Once you are able to answer this question you have the likely source.
And of course I have not even talked about the Western involvement here and their plans of reshaping the region. Also that part you can investigate based on what has occurred in the past 3-4 years and once again connect the dots.
Better to understand what is currently going on, look at Syria and the actions of those regimes, groups etc. who supposedly want the Al-Assad regime removed yet do nothing , let alone did nothing for years before Russia suddenly appeared "out of nowhere". The last claim is of course another lie and we all know that the West and Russia cooperate together in Syria.
Syria by itself is not so interesting or special but the politics that have followed and will follow will tell us a lot about the future goals of certain regimes and powers in regards to the region and its future.
