Posted on Mar 7, 2015
Does using Da'ish or DAESH to refer to ISIS/ISIL/IS make a difference in the operational effectiveness of the terrorist group?
4.51K
13
10
0
0
0
ISIS sometimes known as ISIL or IS has rebranded itself a few times. Western leaders came up with what is considered a pejorative term [Da'ish or DAESH] in one of many open efforts to reduce the appeal of the terrorist organization. ISIS has in the past enjoyed some success in recruiting young people - both men and women - to join them through slick media campaigns among other things. What was once known as Psyops is always interesting to watch - sometimes it has been effective.
Islam
Middle East
Europe
Iraq
Edited >1 y ago
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 6
Daesh is actually what they call it in Arabic speaking countries. It has nothing to do with anyone in West to include their leaders. If were to go to the Middle East they know Daesh more than ISIS. It has to to do with the absence of sounds in translation. In addition the term ISIL has something to do with the historical names of the countries. Syria was also know as the Lavent.
Also, ISIS is nothing new. I don't understand why everyone thinks it is some new entity. It has been around for a while. It used to be AQI but when you get a new leader he wants to call it by something new. It was not the west who picks their name.
On 12 October 2006, MSC united with three smaller groups and six Sunni Islamic tribes to form the "Mutayibeen Coalition", that swore by Allah "...to rid Sunnis from the oppression of the rejectionists (Shi'ite Muslims) and the crusader occupiers, ... to restore rights even at the price of our own lives... to make Allah's word supreme in the world, and to restore the glory of Islam...".[72][73] A day later, MSC declared the establishment of the Islamic State of Iraq (ISI), which should comprise Iraq's six mostly Sunni Arab governorates,[74] with Abu Omar al-Baghdadi being announced as its Emir.[43][75] Al-Masri was given the title of Minister of War within the ISI's ten-member cabinet.[
Also, ISIS is nothing new. I don't understand why everyone thinks it is some new entity. It has been around for a while. It used to be AQI but when you get a new leader he wants to call it by something new. It was not the west who picks their name.
On 12 October 2006, MSC united with three smaller groups and six Sunni Islamic tribes to form the "Mutayibeen Coalition", that swore by Allah "...to rid Sunnis from the oppression of the rejectionists (Shi'ite Muslims) and the crusader occupiers, ... to restore rights even at the price of our own lives... to make Allah's word supreme in the world, and to restore the glory of Islam...".[72][73] A day later, MSC declared the establishment of the Islamic State of Iraq (ISI), which should comprise Iraq's six mostly Sunni Arab governorates,[74] with Abu Omar al-Baghdadi being announced as its Emir.[43][75] Al-Masri was given the title of Minister of War within the ISI's ten-member cabinet.[
(3)
(0)
LTC Stephen F.
I am very familiar with many aspects of what is known as the Middle East. in the 1970s, I was interested to see the Palestinian terrorists groups rebrand/regroup/splinter into other groups as they learned to both protect their operations and add their own spin to the news cycle. IS has demonstrated that they are media savvy, they learned from their predecessors including the various Al Qaida groups. I know there are a number of efforts designed to interrupt or corrupt the decision and "press release" cycle of IS. A month or so ago several western leaders were promoting the use of Daesh saying that the use of ISIS was offensive, probably intended for Muslims in western countries, to discredit IS. I think this is part of an effort to distance IS from Islam as many leaders are attempting to focus on the terror aspect ignoring Al-Baghdadi's many time stated understanding that he is clearly following what the Koran teaches.
(0)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
LTC Stephen F. I think that is only a western thing. I am in the Middle East. The phase "ISIS" isn't Arabic and has to be translated. In Arabic it is actually "Daesh." It is just words but if you were speaking to those in the ME you should use Daesh as it is understood better. I don't think it is offensive because Daesh means the same thing but in Arabic.
(1)
(0)
LTC Stephen F.
Thanks Eric. I hope you are secure where you are - the Army or USMC version of secure. I expect you have already seen the different versions of what secure a building means among the various Services.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
Simply put, Yes. Calling them ISIL solidifies their stance in their process of being a so called, "legitimate calliphate". Da'esh is a name meaning to insult their efforts. A name is truly insightful in its meaning.
http://www.americansecurityproject.org/whats-in-a-name-isil-being-labeled-daesh/
http://www.americansecurityproject.org/whats-in-a-name-isil-being-labeled-daesh/
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
I have no clue as to how the operational effectiveness of any terrorist group would depend upon what we call them. However, I am certain that it affects both our military response and political posture if we fail to name our enemy which is what the current Administration chooses to do.
(2)
(0)
LTC Stephen F.
Jack, I concur about our current administration's public statements. I think changing the term the public hears is designed to impact the success of IS recruiting efforts among young Muslims and terrorist/thug wannabes. I hope the other behind-the-scene efforts are more effective at disrupting their income flow and recruiting efforts. I certainly hope the efforts of local and state governments in Oregon, Minnesota, and New York are calling a spade a spade and are not hindered by political correctness.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google