The Syrian town of Kobane, also known as Ain-al-Arab, has been the site of fierce fighting between Syrian Kurds and Islamic State (ISIS) for over three weeks. Some have even come to see it as a crucible for President Obama’s military strategy, arguing that if ISIS can still make territorial gains despite US air strikes, the chances for total victory over Islamic State are pretty bleak.

President Obama’s plan to destroy Islamic State is ineffective at best. Rather, NATO allies should aim towards forcing the terrorist organization to implode from within.

While it’s expected that it will be the Kurds who separate from Iraq, the real beneficiaries from a break-up of the country would be the Shia. They’re the ones who control 80 percent of the country’s oil wealth, and they would prefer not to share it with hostile neighbors.

Islamic State has a deep and sophisticated internet presence unlike any of the jihadist groups that came before it.

Part two continues to highlight the reasons why Islamic State is unlike any other jihadist threat yet faced by the international community, and how a break-up of the Iraqi may be looming on the horizon.

Whatever language you use – observers, air support, trainers – President Obama is sending the American military back to Iraq.

It took just one day for President Obama’s announcement of US air strikes in ISIS-held Iraq to translate into operational reality, and the first target chosen by US forces illustrates why this policy shift came about.

Last week’s ISIS-led offensive suggests that Washington’s worst-case scenario is about to unfold in Iraq.

What does the worsening refugee situation in Iraqi Kurdistan mean for Syria's civil war?

The leader of Iraqi Kurdistan is making his mark on Iraqi politics.