It’s been a while. Frankly, with the onset of maturity it becomes more difficult to associate oneself with the madness of the human species. Its lust for power over its fellows can surely only end in its downfall.

With the advent of ISIS in the Middle East, the West is once more in a state of confusion. Our politicians scurry round like church mice searching for the last dropped morsel from the communion table. They spout all sorts of crazy notions for dealing with this latest threat to the West’s centuries-long complacency: that we can treat others with disdain and never face the consequences.


ISIS is no minor Arab skirmish between tribes vying for power. It poses a threat to the world comparable with Nazi Germany in the 1930s. The world shilly-shallied then. It’s behaving in a similar manner today. ISIS must be stopped while it’s still possible to do so. It’s forces grow stronger with each day that passes.

Yesterday, it was ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria). Today, it’s IS (Islamic State). Tomorrow, it will be ICME (Islamic Caliphate of the Middle East).

Make no mistake, its leaders intend world domination. They’ll not be content with reclaiming the lands of the Ottoman. Their quest is total Islam, just as the Nazi intention was world Aryanism.

Meanwhile, Obama talks. He talks with European leaders; he talks with his opposition leaders. He wants to “…train and arm the moderate Syrian rebels…”. Who are they? Where are they? The truth is they’ve collapsed under the weight of militant Islamic forces in Syria, and are no longer a viable opposition.

The West “trained and armed” the Iraqi army; they “trained and armed” the Afghan army; they “trained and armed the Libyan rebels against Gaddafi”. We’ve seen the results of such “training and arming”.

In Iraq, the army was routed and ISIS helped themselves to the US arms; in Afghanistan, the army regularly assassinates US soldiers and much of the arms end up with the Taliban; in Libya, the country is overrun with armed thugs vying for power and the government has collapsed.

The West is not good at “training and arming” it’s so-called ‘allies’. Yet, Obama wants to utilize the same, failed, tactics that have resulted in nothing but misery and suffering for millions of innocents in the nations the US has “trained and armed”.

There’s a simple solution to the ISIS problem, but it’s not a politically acceptable one in the West. NATO needs to join forces with the Assad regime in Syria and destroy the ISIS strongholds, put an end to the Syrian civil war, then use its diplomatic muscle to work peaceably with Assad towards an, eventually, democratic Syria.

Assad is not the ogre painted by the West. He was working to effect change in his country before the civil war, but Islamic extremists scuppered his plans and whipped up the Sunni base to rebellion, hoping to gain power themselves.

Why is the West determined to dethrone Assad? Because Saudi Arabia wants rid of him. Obama talks of procuring Saudi military assistance (‘boots on the ground’), but with much of the ISIS funding coming from that region, albeit nefariously, it’s unlikely King Abdullah will be too keen to publicize any firm allegiance. Besides, the Saudi royals are desperate to rid themselves of the Assad regime in Syria, a Mediterranean ally of the hated Shia Iran.

It’s vitally important to note that the US/UK invasion of Iraq in 2002 is DIRECTLY responsible for the situation in that country today, the rise of ISIS, and the subsequent deaths and atrocities committed by that organization. Had Saddam Hussein remained in power he would never had allowed his nation to sink so far into the political mire it could be overwhelmed so easily. He would have routed ISIS, just as he did with al-Qaeda – despite the lies perpetrated by Western propaganda.

Americans, or those 84% who voted to invade Iraq in 2002, have the blood of hundreds of thousands on their hands, yet public opinion here is turning in favor of military action based solely on the executions of two men, just because they happened to hold US passports.

It’s time for the West to take concerted action, and let the Gulf states complain about it if they choose. But, it won’t happen. Western politicians will procrastinate, just as they did in the 1930s, and ISIS will grow and grow.

When asked about his support for US military action, one senator, from a certain Southern state, told an NBC reporter yesterday:

I just can’t see the end game in this, and I can’t support military action without a viable endgame.”

He obviously hasn’t given a moment’s thought to what “the endgame” might be, if we do nothing.

[1] “Islamic State: Where does jihadist group get its support?” BBC, September 1st 2014

4 Replies to “ISIS, IS, Or ICME?”

  1. Nice to see you back, RJ! I understand your feelings about the madness all around us though.

    I’ve read your thoughts on ISIS here – I shall need to come back and read them again to clear my mind. Your views are a bit different from those I’ve gleaned for myself from various sources (excluding TV). Yours might be the right way to look at things (i.e. that ISIS unchecked could be equated to the rise of Nazis in the 1930s).

    I see it all as desperate attempts, with cover explanations, to control the oil reserves of the ME, and make money for arms manufacturers and jobs for MIC at the same time.

    I don’t know what to think – never have known what to think about middle-eastern matters, other than feeling desperately sorry of the ordinary people there whose lives are living hells, and have been for centuries.

  2. Twilight -it is confusing, mainly due to the various factions, all with their own agendas. For instance, while Assad’s regime is the sworn enemy of ISIS, certain organizations within the regime are trading arms with ISIS. It seems crazy but in reality is all part of the ‘corporate agenda’ within Syria being at odds with the government’s agenda.

    We have a similar situation here in the US, of course: oil companies, arms suppliers, all at odds with the ‘official’ government terrorism doctrine, and trying to manipulate Congress, via lobbying, to their own advantage. Hence the splits in publicly expressed opinions by senators, influenced by the corporate lobbyists they support.

    Then there are the ME factions: Saudi Arabia, Qatar, as allies of America, are publicly opposed to ISIS, yet privately favor ISIS as a means to further their political ends i.e. a wider Sunni influence in the region (or, perhaps more accurately, a diminishing of Shia power).

    Turkey, a member of NATO, is officially opposed to ISIS, yet unofficially trades with them across the Syrian/Turkish border and has a Muslim population 75% Sunni, many of whom will be sympathetic to ISIS.

    Confusing? Undoubtedly! And ISIS is using this confusion to increase its power massively, while Obama scratches his head and wonders who he can trust, even within his own government, let alone in the Middle East. Europe is his only reliable ally in this, which is why he’s been spending so much time over there of late.

    As you rightly point out: as always, the innocents on the ground suffer abominably while politicians and power-mongers wrangle amongst themselves.

    Meanwhile, like Germany in the 1930s, ISIS grows massively stronger with each passing day.

  3. Thanks for the extra observations RJ. Dang – but it’s like me looking at one of those advanced equations we had to puzzle over at school in algebra (quite uselessly) – I’d go cross-eyed and mushy-brained before the ink dried. (Ye gods – we actually did use proper pens and ink wells too! I’m really old!)

    Husband said last evening that he’s not going to worry about all the problems the world now faces, because he knows there’s nothing he can influence one way or the other, but he would be influencing his own health and well-being by worrying too much….he’s right. Yet, it’s not easy to ignore and not worry about what’s going on.

  4. I think you’ve just about got it right here, RJ.

    ISIS (or whatever they choose to call themselves) is probably the biggest threat, not only to civilization but to evolution, that the world has faced for a long time.

    I would not equate ISIS with Hitler’s ‘National Socialism’ which was essentially a German movement and ideology.

    It was forward not backward looking (There were no Nazi suicide bombers)

    What Hitler wanted was a European trading block with Germany at the centre. And it seems to have been achieved!

    I agree also with your comments about the two ‘big baddies’ Saddam and Assad. You need strong leaders in that region to get any kind of stability. (the ever pragmatic Putin knew this of course, when everyone in the West was shouting for Assad’s removal.)

Comments are closed.