From a Private School in Cairo to ISIS Killing Fields in Syria

[clacy]

Wow, this is a powerful (9 min) video that puts a human face to how seemingly normal Muslim young adults transform into ISIS killers....

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/fro ... cid=LENDHP

[Pointedstick]

*sigh*

There is no single path that leads to jihad, but in exploring Mr. Yaken’s life, signposts emerge. There are influences familiar and easy to discuss, like a lack of economic opportunity and a renewed sense of political alienation, especially among youths. But there are also more delicate subjects — less often publicly debated, let alone dissected — like the increasingly conservative thinking that defines the faith for many Muslims today, or sexual repression among young people who are taught that their physical and emotional desires can bring them eternal damnation.

It's a volatile combination, to be sure.

[clacy]

This is a world wide problem that is exploding before our eyes (but is decades and maybe even centuries in the making).  Unfortunately it looks like there is no good answer for this problem.

Death and destruction is the only sure thing going forward in this region, and possibly beyond. 

I have yet to hear one good strategy for ending or even containing this problem that doesn't result in hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dead people in the next decade. 

[fnord123]

I have yet to hear one good strategy for ending or even containing this problem that doesn't result in hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dead people in the next decade.

Other than small scale terrorism, what has you thinking there will be hundreds of thousands/millions of dead people?

In terms of containing ISIS, please consider the following two maps:

Map #1: Ethnoreligious groups of Iraq:

Map #2: ISIS penetration into Iraq as of Feb 15, 2015:


Note the extremely high correlation between majority Sunni/Arab areas being occupied by ISIS. Conversely, if you look at areas that are strongly Sunni Kurd or Shia Arab, ISIS has pretty much made zero progress.  There are maps going back to June of last year that pretty much show the same thing.  This clearly shows that ISIS is not rapidly progressing in their expansion - they are pretty much stuck by ethnic lines. 

Containment of ISIS isn't hard: Break up Iraq and give the Sunni portion their own country. Sell their neighbors some good weapons if they need it to help contain them.  If the Sunnis want to form a barbaric theocracy, that's their problem.  Of course, they may do crap like Madrassas around the world to inculcate crazy beliefs in others, or maybe some of their citizens might go and do massive terrorism in the US.  However, I don't see any of the more right-leaning folks on this board supporting my suggestion to invade Saudi Arabia (which has done these things), so why should IsisSunniArabia be treated any differently?

[MachineGhost]

However, I don't see any of the more right-leaning folks on this board supporting my suggestion to invade Saudi Arabia (which has done these things), so why should IsisSunniArabia be treated any differently?

Are you serious?  Comparing a modern Arab state like Saudi Arabia with an anarchronistic jihadist state like ISIS is like the difference between Humpty Dumpty and a cracked egg.  Why don't we attack Iran for sponsoring terrorism, Hezbollah, etc.?  Same reason.  Invading Iraq was a HUGE MISTAKE -- no NeoCon disputes that now except Cheney and his unicorns which are all now about as important as flies on the ass of a horse.

[fnord123]

Are you serious?  Comparing a modern Arab state like Saudi Arabia with an anarchronistic jihadist state like ISIS is like the difference between Humpty Dumpty and a cracked egg.  Why don't we attack Iran for sponsoring terrorism, Hezbollah, etc.?  Same reason.  Invading Iraq was a HUGE MISTAKE -- no NeoCon disputes that now except Cheney and his unicorns which are all now about as important as flies on the ass of a horse.

How is Saudi Arabia a modern state?  They behead people for sorcery and adultery. They cut off peoples' hands for thieving. They brainwash people world-wide with extremist Islamic beliefs with their madrassas.

That being said, I do not think we should invade Saudi Arabia, Iran, Lebanon, *or* the ISIS regions.  I was trying to find out why folks who want to invade the ISIS regions don't also advocate invading Saudi Arabia. At least some of the criticisms against ISIS are true for Saudia Arabia, in kind if not in degree.

[MachineGhost]

That being said, I do not think we should invade Saudi Arabia, Iran, Lebanon, *or* the ISIS regions.  I was trying to find out why folks who want to invade the ISIS regions don't also advocate invading Saudi Arabia. At least some of the criticisms against ISIS are true for Saudia Arabia, in kind if not in degree.

It's simple.  The Saudi Royal Family are not jihadists.  They may be inhumane to their citizens but they're not looking to take over the world.

[fnord123]

It's simple.  The Saudi Royal Family are not jihadists.  They may be inhumane to their citizens but they're not looking to take over the world.

The Saudi Royal family themselves are a bunch of rich old men, they do not wage jihad themselves by strapping bombs on themselves.  However, they use their riches to foment jihad all over the world.  Saudi inspired Jihad has hurt us much, much more than ISIS ever did.

Quoting the Rand corporation: "[The Saudis are] active at every level of the terror chain, from planners to financiers, from cadre to foot-soldier, from ideologist to cheerleader. . . . Saudi Arabia supports our enemies and attacks our allies . . . [and is] the kernel of evil, the prime mover, the most dangerous opponent". (source)

U.S. News and World Report: "[T]he desert kingdom has been the single greatest force in spreading Islamic fundamentalism, while its huge, unregulated charities funneled hundreds of millions of dollars to jihad groups and al Qaeda cells around the world." (“The Saudi Connection: How Billions in Oil Money Spawned a Global Terror Network,”? U.S. News and World Report, December 15, 2003)

Hillary Clinton in 2009 while secretary of state: “Saudi Arabia remains a critical financial support base for al-Qa’ida, the Taliban, LeT [i.e., Lashkar e-Tayyiba, a Pakistan-based Islamic terrorist group], and other terrorist groups, including Hamas”? and that “donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide.”? (source).

[MachineGhost]

Shrug, you got me.  We must like cheap oil.

[clacy]

It's simple.  The Saudi Royal Family are not jihadists.  They may be inhumane to their citizens but they're not looking to take over the world.

The Saudi Royal family themselves are a bunch of rich old men, they do not wage jihad themselves by strapping bombs on themselves.  However, they use their riches to foment jihad all over the world.  Saudi inspired Jihad has hurt us much, much more than ISIS ever did.

Quoting the Rand corporation: "[The Saudis are] active at every level of the terror chain, from planners to financiers, from cadre to foot-soldier, from ideologist to cheerleader. . . . Saudi Arabia supports our enemies and attacks our allies . . . [and is] the kernel of evil, the prime mover, the most dangerous opponent". (source)

U.S. News and World Report: "[T]he desert kingdom has been the single greatest force in spreading Islamic fundamentalism, while its huge, unregulated charities funneled hundreds of millions of dollars to jihad groups and al Qaeda cells around the world." (“The Saudi Connection: How Billions in Oil Money Spawned a Global Terror Network,”? U.S. News and World Report, December 15, 2003)

Hillary Clinton in 2009 while secretary of state: “Saudi Arabia remains a critical financial support base for al-Qa’ida, the Taliban, LeT [i.e., Lashkar e-Tayyiba, a Pakistan-based Islamic terrorist group], and other terrorist groups, including Hamas”? and that “donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide.”? (source).

I guess at the end of the day, a bunch of rich, old men trying to do the bare minimum from a social reform stand point to control their monetary interests is MUCH better than letting a violent group of religious extremists run roughshod through an entire section of the world decapitating and burning people alive.

I'm pretty sure the women of Saudi Arabia prefer their current state to living under ISIS rule.

[fnord123]

MUCH better than letting a violent group of religious extremists run roughshod through an entire section of the world decapitating and burning people alive.

I'm pretty sure the women of Saudi Arabia prefer their current state to living under ISIS rule.

This is the "bad things are happening somewhere in the world so the US must fix it" argument.

Empirically we've tried to do this in the past and failed.  Examples: Somalia (1993), Beirut (1983), Iraq (2003), Afghanistan (2001).  Things did not get better due to our involvement.

We also ignored bad things in other places - why do we care so much about bad things in Sunni areas of the Middle East, but not about bad things in others, e.g. Rwanda (1994), South Sudan (2012)?  Should we invade there too?

[MachineGhost]

We also ignored bad things in other places - why do we care so much about bad things in Sunni areas of the Middle East, but not about bad things in others, e.g. Rwanda (1994), South Sudan (2012)?  Should we invade there too?

The U.S. is the world's policeman and the enforcer of the petrodollar hegemony.  So we all have certain responsibilities of leadership which seems to include intervening in humanitarian crisises which Rwanda, South Sudan and ISIS represent, but Saudi Arabia does not.  Riddle me this: Why is the U.N. so ineffective that the U.S. has to take up the slack?

[clacy]

This is the "bad things are happening somewhere in the world so the US must fix it" argument.

Empirically we've tried to do this in the past and failed.  Examples: Somalia (1993), Beirut (1983), Iraq (2003), Afghanistan (2001).  Things did not get better due to our involvement.

We also ignored bad things in other places - why do we care so much about bad things in Sunni areas of the Middle East, but not about bad things in others, e.g. Rwanda (1994), South Sudan (2012)?  Should we invade there too?

Certainly we can't fix everything.  In fact, we can't fix everything in our own country, but I guess I'm not ok with idly standing by while these guys butcher people.  They aren't going to be stopped except with violence.  They will keep pushing until they get a reaction, so we might as well face the fact that this has to be dealt with.

The question is, what is the best strategy?

I certainly don't think the answer lies in the White House, as Obama has made it clear he wants to avoid calling it what it is at all costs. 

At a bare minimum, there needs to be some leadership out of the US, and currently we're getting NONE.  Arm and fund their enemies at the very least.  Let them do the ground work, while we use our air power.

Currently, we're not even doing that as we have publicly denied aid to Egypt recently.

I get it, the administration was rooting for the Muslim Brotherhood, so they do not like that the Egyptian military overthrew the Brotherhood, but this seems like a no-brainer to arm Egypt, who has proven to be one of the most reliable players in the ME for a couple of decades now.

[Libertarian666]

How about if we mind our own business for a change?
I realize that makes me a ^&*(#% wimp according to all the keyboard commandos here, but so be it.

[MachineGhost]

How about if we mind our own business for a change?
I realize that makes me a ^&*(#% wimp according to all the keyboard commandos here, but so be it.

That would have worked before ISIS.  But no one listened.

[dualstow]

How about if we mind our own business for a change?
I realize that makes me a ^&*(#% wimp according to all the keyboard commandos here, but so be it.

You may have occasionally received a slice of Reub-barb pie, but I don't think it makes you a wimp at all. It  might even put you in the majority here. At least, I am willing to bed that Tenn, fnord, madbean, stone, jan van and many others are for non-intervention.

I don't know if attacking ISIS will increase or decrease attacks on cartoonists in Europe or perhaps shopping malls in the midwest of the U.S., but I cannot imagine not attacking ISIS even if it's what they want. The name "Islamic State" belies the fact that they are seeking armageddon. That needs to be dealt with head on.