Kurds Reportedly Retake Kobane From "Demoralized" ISIS


Der Spiegel

The western front of the battle against the Islamic State (ISIS) in Iraq and Syria may not be going well for ISIS. Al-Arabiya reports:

Kurdish fighters have seized the security and government district of Syria's Kobane from the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) group and now control 80 percent of the border town, a monitoring group said Monday.

"The People's Protection Units (YPG) fighting the jihadists [ISIS] for nearly four months have full control of the security district," the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said.

The Britain-based group said Kurdish fighters had seized control of the area after fierce clashes since Sunday night.

The Kurdish fight against ISIS has unified various Kurdish factions and quickened the creation of a Kurdish proto-state in northern Iraq, as Der Speigel reported from on the ground:

Officially, we're in the Kurdish autonomous region in northern Iraq. Really, though, it is a PKK [Kurdish Workers' Party] state. A region of 50 square kilometers (19 square miles) of rugged, mountainous territory, it provides a home for PKK leadership in addition to training camps for fighters. It also has its own police force and courts. The surrounding hillsides are idyllic with their pomegranate trees, flocks of sheep and small stone huts. But they are also dotted with Humvees, captured by the PKK from the Islamic State terrorist militia, which had stolen them from the Iraqi army.

It is here in the Qandil Mountains that PKK leaders coordinate their fight against Islamic State jihadists in the Syrian town of Kobani and in the Iraqi metropolis of Kirkuk in addition to the ongoing battle in the Sinjar Mountains. Turkey, some fear, could soon be added to the list.

Despite the alignment of interests with the United States and other Western powers who have backed the fight against ISIS, the PKK remains on the State Department's list of foreign terrorist organization for employing violence against Turkish civilians in its campaign for an independent Kurdish state.

h/t Gwen

NEXT: Boston Nabs U.S. Olympics Nomination. Sucks to Be Boston.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. What does Courtney Love have to say about all of this?

    1. I wonder if we could find out by polling Millenials??

    2. Nobody fucks with Kurd Kobane.

        1. Yeah – +4!

      1. Smells Like Islamic Spirit

        1. They must have had a blast!

  2. Awesome!! We need to just arm the hell out of the Kurds and let them settle a few things over there.

    Beyond that, it is most certainly for the wrong reasons and probably by accident, but I think Obama is doing the right thing against ISIS. We can’t win Iraq’s wars for them forever. It is very tempted to go back in and slaughter ISIS. And indeed, if ISIS sponsors a big terrorist attack on US soil, we will have to. Absent that, it does no good to go back into Iraq. Yes, we could slaughter ISIS very easily, but then what? Unless the Iraqis do it, the radicals will just come back after we leave.

    And as far as that meaning Iraq “falling under the spell of Iran”, well, I wish Iran luck with that. Exactly how Iran thinks getting hip deep trying to dominate Iraq is a good idea, is beyond me.

    1. Yeah, can’t argue with that. At some point locals have to take control of the situation. And the Kurds seem like the only ones up to the job.

      1. It also reminds me of just how horrible the Iraqi government/military are that these brave Kurds have to beat these guys’ asses all by themselves.

    2. it is most certainly for the wrong reasons and probably by accident, but I think Obama is doing the right thing against ISIS.

      This, through the veil of getting his intelligence reports from NYT and WaPo.

    3. No, I’m pretty sure Congressman King said we have to surrender all our money and rights to defete them.

      1. No, I’m pretty sure Congressman King said we have to surrender all our money and rights to defete them.

        I hope for his sake he was standing behind a podium big enough to hide his massive erection he sprouted at the thought of us surrendering all our rights. Otherwise, that could be embarrassing for him.

    4. That’s what I’ve been saying about this.

      He accidentally stumbled into a working intervention because someone with skin in the game was willing to put boots on the ground *and* is more than (at best) marginally pro-‘freedom’. Unlike in Libya where all we did was enable the sorts of people who were *worse* than what they were fighting.

      I’m still against foreign intervention as a common response to conflicts around the world – but if we’re going to do them at all, then this one is a case study in how to do them right.

  3. I wish Iran luck with that. Exactly how Iran thinks getting hip deep trying to dominate Iraq is a good idea, is beyond me.

    They’re going to do that and save Assad and finance Yemen’s Houthi’s with the money they don’t have.

    1. Again, good luck. The only thing that does for them is give them a good supply of foreign Arab thugs to murder and oppress the Persian population of Iran.

      Iran has a great tradition of importing Arab baboons to do the dirty work of oppressing their people going back to the Shah.

  4. Thank God America is bombing ISIS. I was trepidatious at first but this was clearly the right decision. ISIS will slowly be beaten back into just another Islamofascist Syrian insurgency and we can start relations with glorious Kurdlahomalbertastan.

    1. trepidatious

      That is a BiTCHIN’ word right there. Nice use!

      1. Thanks. I really like that word.

    2. How much are we actually bombing them? Since the narrative is that Obama got us out of Iraq, what we are actually doing there gets very little coverage.

      1. I thought it was a dozen targets a day or so. I’m too lazy to look it up right now. FDA *insists* air power can’t beat ISIS! THEORY OVER EVIDENCE

        1. Air power isn’t defeating them. Kurds on the ground are beating them. Air power is providing a nice assist.

          1. Air power saved Kobani, which is turning into an ISIS-grinder. Iraqi forces have had some success elsewhere.

            1. Air power can be incredibly successful if you have ground forces paired with it.

              We do in Kobane, they’re just not American military.

            2. Air power didn’t save Kobani – air power alone would have done nothing except leave a lot of smoking holes in the ground for more ISIS to take cover in.

              Air power has *amplified* the ability of the YPG to project power though.

              1. I don’t know about that. ISIS is retarded. There’s a very real possibility they would have just driven around in pickups getting blown up by drones.

                ISIS showed up to Kobane with fucking tanks and heavy artillery and the Kurds held them off on their own for months despite running out of ammunition. The people who join ISIS are thugs with RPGs. Even a mediocre army can hold them off relatively easily.

              2. Kobane would probably have fallen without the air campaign, hence the air campaign saved it.

                1. It probably saved it. Your initial comment seemed to say that air power could beat ISIS, which is less clear.

        2. The Food and Drug Administration doesn’t know anything about warmaking, obviously. 😉

          1. They don’t understand food and drug safety either.

            1. And they really are regulating everything these days. What exactly is an FDA approved bombing run?

              1. Ones in which they drop meals that adhere to the FDA approved food pyramid. Eventually the the ISIS fighters will be too fat to be a threat.

          2. LOL. I was talking about area peacenazi Francisco d’Antonio.

            1. Oh, just when I think you are being somewhat reasonable about a war related topic. Isn’t FdA the one who was a military pilot? Or am I confusing him with someone else that starts with F?

              1. Yes, he was a military pilot. Cytotoxic calls anyone who disagrees with him on military action a peacenazi.

        3. What the air strikes are doing is leveling the playing field. The YPG mostly has only small arms – no armor, no artillery. They’re more skilled fighters than most of the ISIS dolts, though, and now that air power is cancelling out ISIS’ advantage in weaponry, the YPG is kicking their asses.

          1. The air strikes aren’t ‘leveling’ the playing field – ISIS and YPG are, on their own, comparable forces. YPG has better training and discipline, ISIS has heavy military hardware taken from the Iraqi Army (that they don’t really know how to deploy properly – see this video of an ISIS tank getting pwned because its fighting unsupported inside a city

            American air power has tilted the table decidedly in YPG’s favor.

            1. These guys have clearly never played Battlefield.

        4. FDA *insists* air power can’t beat ISIS! THEORY OVER EVIDENCE

          Christ, you are ignorant.

          First, that’s not what I said. I said conventional military forces cannot defeat terrorism. You are SO fucking ignorant you can’t even properly frame the issue.

          Beat ISIS? Can you even tell me what that means? To what end? What US political objectives are we achieving?

          You do realize that winning battles doesn’t win wars, right? The US never lost a major battle in all of the Vietnam war. Same with Iraq and Afghanistan. We lost those wars because we had no fucking idea what winning meant. Because idiots, like you, who don’t know the difference between tactical, operational and strategic victories were running the show.

          You do realize that without a political objective (strategy) to work towards, there is NO “WINNING”? What’s your plan? What political objective do you hope to achieve? What does winning mean?

          Fighting battles for the sake of fighting battles does nothing but waste lives and resources. When ISIS has their back to the wall they will simply fade into the wood-work, rename themselves and re-engage after we’ve left. How many times do you plann to go back to the same shithole? Is Canada going to fund that for us? Replace the men and equipment we are grinding into the sand for nothing?

          You’re an armchair internet tuff guy who doesn’t know the first fucking thing about employing the military to achieve national strategic interests.

          1. but the people the media sais are bad guyzz got blowed up!
            so… its a win right?

    3. If Nixon had made Kurdistan the 51st state back when they asked, this would be much easier.

      1. It’s not too late! Let’s invite them into the fold!

        1. I don’t think they want to swap one set of overlords on a sinking ship for another.

          1. Kurdistan could rejuvenate us. You know how when a marriage is going badly, deciding to have a kid as a sort of pick-me-up pretty much always works to solve your relationship problems?

            It will be just like that.

            1. That sounds like a potatoe-face non-solution to a potatoe-face problem. This is my dickish way of saying that the Irish like to solve their marriage abuse with unplanned babies.

  5. When the Kurds win this fight I may plan a visit to spend my dollars there

    Ski diplomacy!

    1. Kurdistan is a nice place. It is absolutely beautiful. And the Kurds are very nice and industrious people. I have no desire to ever see the Persian Gulf or really any part of Arab Iraq again. But I would go back to Kurdistan if it ever got safe.

    2. Hot Dog is the greatest ski movie ever made.

    3. That’s actually a nice looking gondola they have. I’m doubting they get 400-inch winters, though.

  6. That website features an article about Lebenon by a Lebenese politican named Nayla Tueni.…..banon.html

    Holy cow, why can’t American politicians look like her? And for God sake’s what kind of monsters are the Islamic radicals for wanting to deprive the world of being able to see the women of the Middle East?

    1. Nayla Tueni is one of the few elected female politicians in Lebanon and of the two youngest.

      I’m sure we have one or two around somewhere.

    2. She activates my cedars of Lebanon.

  7. PKK [Kurdish Workers’ Party]

    So basically we could have saved ourselves a lot of trouble by just letting the soviets have afghanistan in the 90s?

    1. If we had known they were only 12 years from complete collapse, in some ways yes.

      Of course if we had not bogged them down in Afghanistan, they might not have collapsed so fast. Given a choice, however, I would rather deal with a communist country than an Islamist one.

      1. Given a choice, however, I would rather deal with a communist country than an Islamist one.

        ‘deal with’, as in ‘interact with’ or ‘deal with’ as in put down?

        1. Interact with, i have no problems engaging in commerce with communists, i just ask that they keep their wacky ideals to themselves

      2. I’d rather have Islamic terrorists than the USSR.

        The USSR ruined Afghanistan it was okay before they invaded. They did this.

        1. Depends on the terrorists. Beyond that, not every communist country is the USSR. I would rather have to deal with say 1980 communist Vietnam than 2014 Pakistan or Iran.

        2. It was okay when they left to. Most of the Islamization occured after the occupation and the US and Saudi Arabia were primarily responsible for organizing the religious extremists into a unified force.

          1. It was not ‘okay’ when the USSR left it was broken warlordy mess. The Saudi and Pakistan augmented the evil factions. America was a benefactor of those that would become the Norther Alliance.

    2. And I wonder if there is a “Party of Kurdish Workers”. If not, there should be.

      1. There’s a few that are close:…..anisations

  8. Call me Miss Muffet, because I like Kurds.

    1. Sadly, I think that is whey over the heads of many here.

  9. Kirt?

  10. The US is still not providing heavy weapons to the Kurds because it continues to pursue its naive policy of trying to appease the Ayatollah by driving them back under the Ayatollah dominated Baghdad government. Shame Shame Shame.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.