Islamic fanatics have changed the Middle East dynamic

[Lite Beer]

EDITORIAL
Islamic fanatics have changed the Middle East dynamic
The Nation

There is also great concern about fighters being drawn to their cause from many other countries

If there ever was an argument for the support of US intervention in Iraq, this is probably the best chance in a long while to mount it.

That's because we are talking about a group of fanatics, the so-called Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (Isis), has rapidly engulfed a big chunk of territory in the region, threatening the make up of the Middle East as we know it.

US President Barack Obama last week, after serious consideration because Washington had proclaimed that there would be no more military intervention in Iraq, ordered military action to prevent a potential genocide in the northern region of the country.

Besides preventing Isis from massacring the Yazidi religious sect, the idea behind the intervention is to stop these radicals - who now call themselves the Islamic State (probably an indication that they will not stop at just Iraq and Syria) - from advancing on Baghdad and the Kurdish capital of Irbil.

The move, which involves limited air strikes and food drops, was welcomed by most Americans, according to various accounts, probably because they didn't want to feel like the past two decades of US involvement in Iraq was for nothing.

The problem with this latest and limited move is that it is tailored too narrowly for a specific region and not connected to any coherent strategy - not for just Iraq but for the entire region. Lebanon, Turkey, Jordan and Israel are not exactly out of the loop if and when the fighters from the Islamic State advance.

The fact that they have captured large numbers of US-made heavy weapons from the Iraqis is not the only point of concern. Isis has succeeded in gaining a huge number of followers from various countries worldwide.

In other words, it is becoming like Afghanistan during the 1980s when the so-called Mujahideen was fighting the Soviet troops. Back then the West called them freedom fighters because they were fighting the Communists. That changed when they turned the guns on the West.

Islamic State fighters came to fight the Syrian government and eventually formulated their own agenda. It's no more hit-and-run like the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan. This time around they are going conventional.

According to various analysts, Isis could be digging their own grave by going convention given the fact that the heavy weapons they obtained will be no match for the might of US and other nations in the region.

But one must not forget that even if Isis do not exist as an entity, the fact that this threat of violence has attracted the participation of extremists from all over the world, and the likelihood that many of these guys will return to their respective country, should at the least be a point of concern.

As for the immediate concern, Washington and its allies should know that Islamic State's campaign cannot be defeated unless action is taken in Syria as well.

Protecting Kurdistan is understandable given it is a pro-Western enclave. But what about the Syrian opposition forces trapped in Aleppo? They are stuck between the government forces and the Isis militants. Don't they deserve any help?

If the US-backed coalition could some how force Isis and the Syrian government to go on the defensive, there would be more breathing space for the Sunni, Shiites and Kurds in all of these places to talk about reconciliation.

But as long as Isis is on the move and going strong, one can forget about political harmony and stability in Iraq or Syria.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/Islamic-fanatics-have-changed-the-Middle-East-dyna-30241085.html

-- The Nation 2014-08-17

[Kerryd]

"But as long as Isis is on the move and going strong, one can forget about political harmony and stability in Iraq or Syria."

Simplistic and misguided. There wasn't any political harmony or stability in Iraq or Syria before "ISIS" decided to start carving out pieces from both countries. It was the very lack of harmony and stability that gave ISIS the opportunity that they decided to take advantage of.

Iraq hasn't had harmony or stability since Saddam was ousted in 2003. Like most dictators, he only maintained that through cruel, violent methods. Despite his overthrow and the presence of foreign troops for over 9 years, Iraq was not stable or harmonic. That was readily apparent from the level of violence that persisted throughout the country during the occupation and which has escalated ever since the last of the foreign troops left. (Something the people in Afghanistan should make note of.)

Syria has been fighting a civil war for over 3 years now. Another failed "Arab Spring" uprising. Another dictator that is willing to use cruel and violent methods to quell dissent. What started out as a "Syrian" matter quickly escalated into a "religious" conflict and has deteriorated to the point where the "rebels" spend more time fighting each other than the oppressive government they were meant to be overthrowing.

What is worrisome the most is what isn't being discussed (publicly). These conflicts are not just about overthrowing oppressive dictators. They are not about giving power back to the people. They are not about "the decadent West".

These conflicts are about religion. Period. Shias versus Sunnis. Both against any and all minorities. Fundamentalist whackos (on every side) against everyone that doesn't follow their specific way of thinking.

There are 2 major regional powerhouses behind most of this (Iran and Saudi Arabia) and their surrogates are providing most of the financing and manpower, yet who does everyone look to, to provide arms and political clout ? The USA. Not the UK. Not France/Italy/Australia/Russia/China/Brazil. F'ing hypocrites. (No, I am not an American.)

They spend years chanting anti-American slogans and full of anti-Western rhetoric (usually over America's support of Israel), until they start getting their asses kicked. Then suddenly if America doesn't immediately side with them and send them arms and money (not necessarily in that order) - those very same people lash out at them for not helping ! I just hope that some saner, smarter heads behind the scenes realize that any arms/money sent will eventually be used against them in the future, by the exact same people.

The Saudis had to pass a law recently forbidding their citizens from going to Syria to fight "for the cause" because they no longer controlled "the cause". They also told their state sponsored clerics to stop fund raising on behalf of those rebels. They had previously encouraged their citizens (and clergy) to support the rebels. Gotta hate it when lap-dog servants turn and bite the hand that feeds them (just ask the US about that).

Iran apparently has no problem continuing their support (other than some disruptions in their supply lines). Clerics and mosques in other countries continue to openly fund-raise on behalf of various rebels, plus the rebels (all good honest Muslims of course) have no problem providing their own financing through bank robberies, extortion, murder, etc. (It's actually a bit ironic if you've studied the early history of their religion.)

It seems the lessons have been forgotten of what can happen when you give groups of untrained, undisciplined, poorly lead civilians large amounts of weapons and "support". Or have they been forgotten ? Seems odd the way some things are reported when it will give a negative image of one group, but the same things are not reported if it will give a different group a negative image. It's almost as if the media wasn't independent, honest or ethical ! Go figure ! If you can control the media, you can control public opinion. Knowledge is power after all. How can the people object to something, if they know nothing about what is really going on ?

What many countries are becoming nervous about, is what happens when all those "civilians" start returning, only now with some degree of training, discipline and leadership. What happens when groups of people who've grown accustomed to enforcing their will at gunpoint return to societies that don't bow down to their specific way of thinking ? What happens when those people, who've gotten used to someone else providing money and support, are suddenly expected to become law-abiding citizens who are expected to earn their living by working, instead of just taking what they want by force ? What happens when those people, brain-washed in combat into a more radical way of thinking, decide that they should be the ones in charge ?

Sadly, there will not be any peace, political harmony or stability in the Middle East for a long time to come. Even if one side was eventually able to exterminate the other (as well as every opposing religion/minority they deem offensive), they will turn on themselves as different factions will have different interpretations of the same ancient writings. (Just how many different Protestant denominations are there now, as an example ? 20 ? 40 ?)

Unfortunately, as the world's population continues to grow faster than it's ability to support itself, and poverty spreads even further and faster, these religions will find no end to the number of people willing to die for a cause. The few with money will continue to use to many without to do their bidding and die for them.

There is no foreseeable end to this situation. Not in our lifetimes. Not in our children's. Not in our great-great grandchildren's. It would take a cataclysmic event of global extermination level in order to end this situation and even then it would likely restart (eventually), perhaps with different names and theologies, but same purpose. This has been our history, is currently our history and will be our history as long as religion continues to dominate society.

There is no foreseeable end to this situation. (Yes, I said it again.)

[Seastallion]

"who now call themselves the Islamic State (probably an indication that they will not stop at just Iraq and Syria) "

A deliberate piece of propaganda and scare-mongering. Who says (with evidence) that ISIS have any other agenda than what their name suggests, Islamic State of Iraq and Syria?

If America and the UN had acted against the Assad regime a year or more ago, would ISIS have gotten the impetus to be what it is today?

If America and the UN acted appropriately against the Zionist criminals in Israel, would extremists have grist for their mills and flock to ISIS?

[96tehtarp]

"If there ever was an argument for the support of US intervention in Iraq, this is probably the best chance in a long while to mount it."

Maybe this time they will find the weapons of mass destruction.

[ggold]

 

"who now call themselves the Islamic State (probably an indication that they will not stop at just Iraq and Syria) "

A deliberate piece of propaganda and scare-mongering. Who says (with evidence) that ISIS have any other agenda than what their name suggests, Islamic State of Iraq and Syria?

If America and the UN had acted against the Assad regime a year or more ago, would ISIS have gotten the impetus to be what it is today?

If America and the UN acted appropriately against the Zionist criminals in Israel, would extremists have grist for their mills and flock to ISIS?

 

If America and the UN acted appropriately against the Zionist criminals in Israel, would extremists have grist for their mills and flock to ISIS

Show me a link where it shows there is a connection between what is happening in Israel and what ISIS is doing. The Arab spring was never about Israel, even today after what has happened in Gaza these past few weeks, there is no connection.

[up-country_sinclair]

It would be interesting to know who on the editorial board of The Nation is responsible for this knee-jerk, sensationalistic propaganda piece.

[Rockhound]

The goal of fundamentalist Islam is the formation of a Global Caliphate. And they will kill anyone who stands in their way. Be they Jew, Christian, Atheist, Hindu - or any Moslem who doesn't share their 7th Century "ideals". The quicker we all realize this and do something about it the better because they have already started. It will not be pretty.

And, thanks to political correctness and "multi-culturism", Western Democracies have already been infiltrated by these savages...

[Scott]

An off-topic post and reply have been deleted.

[Kalserud]

The Islamic State (Full Length Video 42:31 min) from August 15, 2014

The Islamic State, a hardline Sunni jihadist group that formerly had ties to al Qaeda, has conquered large swathes of Iraq and Syria.

https://news.vice.com/video/the-islamic-state-full-length?utm_source=vicenewsfb

Edited August 17, 2014 by Kalserud

[joshstiles]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

"If there ever was an argument for the support of US intervention in Iraq, this is probably the best chance in a long while to mount it."

Maybe this time they will find the weapons of mass destruction.

....hmmmm "weapons of mass destruction".....I think this refers to the mindset of the middle eastern people which have warred with each other for thousands of years....it'll be the same ole same ole....forever.....don't anyone hold your breath.

[rethaier]

"who now call themselves the Islamic State (probably an indication that they will not stop at just Iraq and Syria) "

A deliberate piece of propaganda and scare-mongering. Who says (with evidence) that ISIS have any other agenda than what their name suggests, Islamic State of Iraq and Syria?

If America and the UN had acted against the Assad regime a year or more ago, would ISIS have gotten the impetus to be what it is today?

If America and the UN acted appropriately against the Zionist criminals in Israel, would extremists have grist for their mills and flock to ISIS?

Q1 Probably yes

Q2 Maybe not, but probably yes.

When Muslims have noone else to fight they will continue to fight each other.

[Asiantravel]

 

"who now call themselves the Islamic State (probably an indication that they will not stop at just Iraq and Syria) "

A deliberate piece of propaganda and scare-mongering. Who says (with evidence) that ISIS have any other agenda than what their name suggests, Islamic State of Iraq and Syria?

If America and the UN had acted against the Assad regime a year or more ago, would ISIS have gotten the impetus to be what it is today?

If America and the UN acted appropriately against the Zionist criminals in Israel, would extremists have grist for their mills and flock to ISIS?

 

If America and the UN acted appropriately against the Zionist criminals in Israel, would extremists have grist for their mills and flock to ISIS

Show me a link where it shows there is a connection between what is happening in Israel and what ISIS is doing. The Arab spring was never about Israel, even today after what has happened in Gaza these past few weeks, there is no connection.

" Show me a link where it shows there is a connection between what is happening in Israel and what ISIS is doing."

ok i couldnt possibly let such a challenge slip by.....................

Several reasons were given as to why Palestinians should hold out hope for ISIS succeeding in their cause when all other Arab, Muslim, and Western claimed Resistance supporters have been abject failures and invariably end up benefiting the Zionist occupation regime terrorizing Palestine. “All countries in this region are playing the sectarian card just as they have long played the Palestinian card but the difference with ISIS is that we are serious about Palestine and they are not. Tel Aviv will fall as fast as Mosul when the time is right”, a DAASH ally explained. Another gentleman insisted, “DAASH will fight where no one else is willing.”

http://mwcnews.net/focus/analysis/42181-al-sham-caliphate.html

Edited August 17, 2014 by Asiantravel

[BobLoblah]

18Aug14.....The fanatics that make up ISIS are nothing more than ' murderers. ' Ever notice how brave they are when holding a gun pointed at someone who is unarmed. Or when a gang of them surround one person while they are chanting ' God is great. ' Yeah, God is great all right and these murdering miscreants will get their Just Reward some day just after they suck in their last breath.

The US of A is doing the right thing by blasting these hairy-faced, dirty, and unkempt excuse for human beings straight to hell. Wonder what crosses their mind when they see the ' jet ' coming over them in the sky...and they begin to sing out loudly ' mommie, mommie, mommie. ' Too late for that now as the jet makes its circle to ' hone in ' on their location and fires its deadly bullet that puts them all in kingdom come.

Ps:...These fanatics are a good example of what happens when you bury your head into a ' so-called ' holy book 5 times a day beginning at the age of 4 or 5. Garbage in---garbage out. But I will say one thing though, it allows the West to test out newer weapons on these uneducated morons.

It should also be noted that since Mohammed started up his new religion of islam, nothing and I mean nothing has been invented by muslimes ever since. Funny that.

[soalbundy]

The goal of fundamentalist Islam is the formation of a Global Caliphate. And they will kill anyone who stands in their way. Be they Jew, Christian, Atheist, Hindu - or any Moslem who doesn't share their 7th Century "ideals". The quicker we all realize this and do something about it the better because they have already started. It will not be pretty.

And, thanks to political correctness and "multi-culturism", Western Democracies have already been infiltrated by these savages...

+ 100 you are saying it as it is, muli-culti political correctness will be our downfall

[rethaier]

18Aug14.....The fanatics that make up ISIS are nothing more than ' murderers. ' Ever notice how brave they are when holding a gun pointed at someone who is unarmed. Or when a gang of them surround one person while they are chanting ' God is great. ' Yeah, God is great all right and these murdering miscreants will get their Just Reward some day just after they suck in their last breath.

The US of A is doing the right thing by blasting these hairy-faced, dirty, and unkempt excuse for human beings straight to hell. Wonder what crosses their mind when they see the ' jet ' coming over them in the sky...and they begin to sing out loudly ' mommie, mommie, mommie. ' Too late for that now as the jet makes its circle to ' hone in ' on their location and fires its deadly bullet that puts them all in kingdom come.

Ps:...These fanatics are a good example of what happens when you bury your head into a ' so-called ' holy book 5 times a day beginning at the age of 4 or 5. Garbage in---garbage out. But I will say one thing though, it allows the West to test out newer weapons on these uneducated morons.

It should also be noted that since Mohammed started up his new religion of islam, nothing and I mean nothing has been invented by muslimes ever since. Funny that.

You make it sound like the US is really giving them hell. Just curiously, how many have they killed by having aircraft "hone in" on their positions. From what I have read it aint many.

[manarak]

the funny thing about the situation is the USA's stance on going to war with ISIS.

Against Saddam, everyone was against the idea, and they went twice.

Against ISIS, I guess a majority would support coalition forces there to act against ISIS, but this time, no, the government has learned its lesson and won't send soldiers in.

Was GW 10 years too early? Or... would ISIS have happened at all without GW?

[sgtsabai]

There were no weapons of mass destruction because Saddam had used all the gas we gave him on the Kurds. Bush the ignorant and friends had their own little christian jihad going and shotgun cheney wanted the money. All were stupid enough to believe they would find some of the stuff we gave Sadam while knowing all along all the rest was nothing but lies. Would it be this bad had the had the US stayed out of Iraq? How about if the US and BP had stayed out of Iran way back when? I don't think so but we have no way of knowing. These people live in countries where the boundaries were drawn up by the west. They have fought each other for centuries and like Kerryd said "There is no foreseeable end to this situation." It has nothing to do with anything but forcing their religion on others. There is a vocal minority in the US that is the same, just not as violent, yet. No, I'm not talking about Muslims, I'm talking about those that claim to be christians. Dominionists.

[arjunadawn]

It is woefully apparent that the only sources of information this author used were various western bylines for news pieces. This piece perpetuates the delusion that only a small minority are carrying out these horrific actions when in fact, a great deal of these atrocities were carried out by neighbors, life long sunni residents living in mixed communities in the north. Dig a little deeper and you will discover that in many places these IS clowns were greeted and welcomed, and that many people were slaughtered by those they have known all their lives. The methods of death and torture have actually been fairly unlimited; crucifixion, rusty beheadings- to include children and infants, evisceration, old stand by-bullets, swords, burned to death, etc.

It fuels the narrative the West seeks to impose on an unaware population when they inculcate through opinion leaders that even al queda finds IS too radical and violent. This is dangerously naive, and an utter lie. One is the parent and opposed the challenge of the child, that is all. To date no one has heard the collective muslim voices of the world declare the interpretations of Hadith and Sura cited to be misapplied or misinterpreted. None! Why? Because ISIS is not remotely radical, as per their liturgy. The great Imams could condemn IS, but they wait with breath held to see what is accomplished- hoping IS is successful. It cannot be otherwise. Whether many muslims would prefer "not-war" the entire ideology inculcates every single day, throughout the world, jihad.

Note:

US involvement had nothing to do with persecuted Christians or others; this was the mask to prevent further marching on Erbil. Numerous minorities continue to be executed horrifically and rape jihad is epidemic. The author is correct that a 1/2 effort will actually empower IS and do nothing strategic; indeed, 1/2 measures always inadvertently reveal our Point of No Return- how far we are prepared to go.

It is naive if not absurd to suggest IS fighters later developed an agenda contrary to what they originally proffered. These people were always ID'd as al queda related operatives. Of course, any who know me know it is here I go further and suggest IS was intentionally founded, supported, funded, and let loose by US and regional Arab players to fracture Iraq into the inevitable 3 sections that are evolving. The US responded because IS turned North toward Erbil, and fracturing the Autonomous Kurdish State is not part of the US Great Game plan (with European co-genociders).

I think the author was suggesting that analysts state IS using heavy/conventional weapons raises this from a LIC Low Intensity Conflict to a MIC- Mid Int Conf. I read news feeds all day, every day, and have not read this anywhere. Moreover, the end game is only incidentally relevant now. What is relevant is the genocide today! The conventional weapons from the USA, and those funneled illegally from the CIA/State safehouse in Tripoli, Libya, most definitely make the USA accountable for the first Muslim Crusade since the destruction of the Subcontinent and Ottoman Empire. Nothing less than the annihilation of many peoples is taking place; this, in a world, where "Never again" was a refrain for both the Jews and a caution to the West to be proactive.

If I, like the radical jihadists, am misunderstanding their religious mandates, please tell me. Don't be rude; explain to me clearly, "as you would a child." Insofar as IS and I both read the same authority for their actions from scripture, just talk with me and point out how we are incorrect, and the remainder of the silent muslim world is right- its silence masking disapproval.

[arjunadawn]

Seastallion, you are correct on all except on one point- if I may. Had the US moved against Asad you are surely correct this dynamic would be very different today. I agree.

However, the mid objectives of IS are known, via their own statements. First, as a child of al queda they too have primary targets, and then subsequent. As I previously instructed Trends in International Terrorism I always found people surprised to learn that the proximate targets of Jihadists were always local arab strongmen; blasphemers to jihadi. The Great and Little Satan actually come later. Nevertheless, IS has already suggested a strike in NY (...see you in New York), and declared the IS flag will "fly over the White House," and that is their aim. (I hope I didn't misinterpret your post).

[Scott]

Off-topic posts deleted along with replies.

[Seastallion]

Seastallion, you are correct on all except on one point- if I may. Had the US moved against Asad you are surely correct this dynamic would be very different today. I agree.

However, the mid objectives of IS are known, via their own statements. First, as a child of al queda they too have primary targets, and then subsequent. As I previously instructed Trends in International Terrorism I always found people surprised to learn that the proximate targets of Jihadists were always local arab strongmen; blasphemers to jihadi. The Great and Little Satan actually come later. Nevertheless, IS has already suggested a strike in NY (...see you in New York), and declared the IS flag will "fly over the White House," and that is their aim. (I hope I didn't misinterpret your post).

At last, someone who appears to actually know what he is talking about, not just a cut and paste keyboard warrior...someone I can learn from and perhaps change my stance.

Very interesting, Ajunadawn. Thanks.

Do post more.

[Thorgal]

Seastallion, you are correct on all except on one point- if I may. Had the US moved against Asad you are surely correct this dynamic would be very different today. I agree.

However, the mid objectives of IS are known, via their own statements. First, as a child of al queda they too have primary targets, and then subsequent. As I previously instructed Trends in International Terrorism I always found people surprised to learn that the proximate targets of Jihadists were always local arab strongmen; blasphemers to jihadi. The Great and Little Satan actually come later. Nevertheless, IS has already suggested a strike in NY (...see you in New York), and declared the IS flag will "fly over the White House," and that is their aim. (I hope I didn't misinterpret your post).

At last, someone who appears to actually know what he is talking about, not just a cut and paste keyboard warrior...someone I can learn from and perhaps change my stance.

Very interesting, Ajunadawn. Thanks.

Do post more.

Yes, please share your knowlledge from your visits to Iraq !

[arjunadawn]

Seastallion, you are correct on all except on one point- if I may. Had the US moved against Asad you are surely correct this dynamic would be very different today. I agree.

However, the mid objectives of IS are known, via their own statements. First, as a child of al queda they too have primary targets, and then subsequent. As I previously instructed Trends in International Terrorism I always found people surprised to learn that the proximate targets of Jihadists were always local arab strongmen; blasphemers to jihadi. The Great and Little Satan actually come later. Nevertheless, IS has already suggested a strike in NY (...see you in New York), and declared the IS flag will "fly over the White House," and that is their aim. (I hope I didn't misinterpret your post).

At last, someone who appears to actually know what he is talking about, not just a cut and paste keyboard warrior...someone I can learn from and perhaps change my stance.

Very interesting, Ajunadawn. Thanks.

Do post more.

Yes, please share your knowlledge from your visits to Iraq !

Sarcasm? No matter; my years throughout Iraq and Iraqi-Kurdistan only had context thru the many years in surrounding Muslim countries. Many people have similar travel experiences. However, my work dealt specifically with these OP matters at a national level, not locally. And yes, while my opinion is just that, I try to reason cogently with dispassion.

[Johpa]

That's because we are talking about a group of fanatics, the so-called Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (Isis), has rapidly engulfed a big chunk of territory in the region, threatening the make up of the Middle East as we know it.

The fallacy is describing ISIS, or even Hamas, as fanatics instead of orthodox Muslim fundamentalists. If they were fanatics surviving on the fringes of Islamic thought then ISIS would not so easily be accommodated and accepted by the tribes in Iraq. It is the same conundrum that prevents more mainstream Muslims from actively voicing opposition to these groups as these groups are simply expressing a very conservative and orthodox interpretation of the Koran. To actively voice opposition to this orthodox interpretation is to risk being labeled a blasphemer or apostate.

[poweratradio]

"But as long as Isis is on the move and going strong, one can forget about political harmony and stability in Iraq or Syria."

Simplistic and misguided. There wasn't any political harmony or stability in Iraq or Syria before "ISIS" decided to start carving out pieces from both countries. It was the very lack of harmony and stability that gave ISIS the opportunity that they decided to take advantage of.

Iraq hasn't had harmony or stability since Saddam was ousted in 2003. Like most dictators, he only maintained that through cruel, violent methods. Despite his overthrow and the presence of foreign troops for over 9 years, Iraq was not stable or harmonic. That was readily apparent from the level of violence that persisted throughout the country during the occupation and which has escalated ever since the last of the foreign troops left. (Something the people in Afghanistan should make note of.)

Syria has been fighting a civil war for over 3 years now. Another failed "Arab Spring" uprising. Another dictator that is willing to use cruel and violent methods to quell dissent. What started out as a "Syrian" matter quickly escalated into a "religious" conflict and has deteriorated to the point where the "rebels" spend more time fighting each other than the oppressive government they were meant to be overthrowing.

What is worrisome the most is what isn't being discussed (publicly). These conflicts are not just about overthrowing oppressive dictators. They are not about giving power back to the people. They are not about "the decadent West".

These conflicts are about religion. Period. Shias versus Sunnis. Both against any and all minorities. Fundamentalist whackos (on every side) against everyone that doesn't follow their specific way of thinking.

There are 2 major regional powerhouses behind most of this (Iran and Saudi Arabia) and their surrogates are providing most of the financing and manpower, yet who does everyone look to, to provide arms and political clout ? The USA. Not the UK. Not France/Italy/Australia/Russia/China/Brazil. F'ing hypocrites. (No, I am not an American.)

They spend years chanting anti-American slogans and full of anti-Western rhetoric (usually over America's support of Israel), until they start getting their asses kicked. Then suddenly if America doesn't immediately side with them and send them arms and money (not necessarily in that order) - those very same people lash out at them for not helping ! I just hope that some saner, smarter heads behind the scenes realize that any arms/money sent will eventually be used against them in the future, by the exact same people.

The Saudis had to pass a law recently forbidding their citizens from going to Syria to fight "for the cause" because they no longer controlled "the cause". They also told their state sponsored clerics to stop fund raising on behalf of those rebels. They had previously encouraged their citizens (and clergy) to support the rebels. Gotta hate it when lap-dog servants turn and bite the hand that feeds them (just ask the US about that).

Iran apparently has no problem continuing their support (other than some disruptions in their supply lines). Clerics and mosques in other countries continue to openly fund-raise on behalf of various rebels, plus the rebels (all good honest Muslims of course) have no problem providing their own financing through bank robberies, extortion, murder, etc. (It's actually a bit ironic if you've studied the early history of their religion.)

It seems the lessons have been forgotten of what can happen when you give groups of untrained, undisciplined, poorly lead civilians large amounts of weapons and "support". Or have they been forgotten ? Seems odd the way some things are reported when it will give a negative image of one group, but the same things are not reported if it will give a different group a negative image. It's almost as if the media wasn't independent, honest or ethical ! Go figure ! If you can control the media, you can control public opinion. Knowledge is power after all. How can the people object to something, if they know nothing about what is really going on ?

What many countries are becoming nervous about, is what happens when all those "civilians" start returning, only now with some degree of training, discipline and leadership. What happens when groups of people who've grown accustomed to enforcing their will at gunpoint return to societies that don't bow down to their specific way of thinking ? What happens when those people, who've gotten used to someone else providing money and support, are suddenly expected to become law-abiding citizens who are expected to earn their living by working, instead of just taking what they want by force ? What happens when those people, brain-washed in combat into a more radical way of thinking, decide that they should be the ones in charge ?

Sadly, there will not be any peace, political harmony or stability in the Middle East for a long time to come. Even if one side was eventually able to exterminate the other (as well as every opposing religion/minority they deem offensive), they will turn on themselves as different factions will have different interpretations of the same ancient writings. (Just how many different Protestant denominations are there now, as an example ? 20 ? 40 ?)

Unfortunately, as the world's population continues to grow faster than it's ability to support itself, and poverty spreads even further and faster, these religions will find no end to the number of people willing to die for a cause. The few with money will continue to use to many without to do their bidding and die for them.

There is no foreseeable end to this situation. Not in our lifetimes. Not in our children's. Not in our great-great grandchildren's. It would take a cataclysmic event of global extermination level in order to end this situation and even then it would likely restart (eventually), perhaps with different names and theologies, but same purpose. This has been our history, is currently our history and will be our history as long as religion continues to dominate society.

There is no foreseeable end to this situation. (Yes, I said it again.)

Who is funding ,feeding and arming these fanatics both in the Middle East and Africa. Is there new arms dealers that rival Al Kassar and Bork who are doing 30 years each.. CUT off their sources.

[MacWalen]

Keep winning their hearts and minds. This strategy really worked and things are steadily improving, right? Great job.

[Steely Dan]

Only one problem with the OP it should read world dynamic not Middle East dynamic, past Islamic conquests and modern multiculturalism have seen to that. To demonstrate Boko Haram slaughtered 1000 Christians two days ago. Indeed Boko Haram, IS, Al-Qaeda and Hamas are like peas in a pod, they have the same 7th century operating system. To see distinct groups and separate problems is obfuscation in order not to cause panic. Then we have the tiny minority meme, which as another poster rightly observed is challenged by reports of Sunni neighbors happily Slaughtering the Yazidis they lived alongside. The tiny minority meme is also challenged when you have tens of thousands of leftists and Muslims protest the largely self inflicted misfortune of Levantine Arabs living in a tiny scrap of land, yet hardly a single protest against Boko Haram or IS slaughtering indiscriminately and on a far larger and more barbaric scale. There were however violent attacks on Kurds protesting against IS in Holland, Denmark and Germany. Here is a good article that covers western press myths about IS.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/busting-the-medias-isis-myths/

An extract: When we talk about ISIS we are really talking about Sunni Arabs in Iraq or Syria, not all of them, but enough to be the standard bearer of the Sunni side of the civil wars in Iraq or Syria.

Change ISIS to Nazis and Sunni Arabs to Germans and you have an idea of how big a problem the world is currently facing.

Edited August 17, 2014 by Steely Dan

[Somtamnication]

The War of Civilizations has already started (Way back with Bush 1). Thanks USA!!

[simple1]

The War of Civilizations has already started (Way back with Bush 1). Thanks USA!!

started way before that event, a reasonable timeline would be the French & British inference that picked up momentum around 150 years ago. Then look at the US views at URL below.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/presquote.html

[Steely Dan]

The War of Civilizations has already started (Way back with Bush 1). Thanks USA!!

started way before that event, a reasonable timeline would be the French & British inference that picked up momentum around 150 years ago. Then look at the US views at URL below.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/presquote.html

Come come now, it all started the first time jihadists marched out of the Arabian peninsula in the 8th century and has happened periodically ever since with rest bites coming during periods such as when Western colonialism was the dominant power in the world.