General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Everyone hates ISIS....So what do you want to do about it ? [View all]Igel
(35,274 posts)That's how I felt about Syria when Bush II was badmouthing Assad and Pelosi went over and called him a partner for reform. He was a bad guy and I fought with DUers who insisted that he wasn't all that bad. Then Obama said he was bad and many DUers had mental whiplash.
That's how I felt about Libya when Reagan/Bush I, Bush II was badmouthing Qaddhafi. Sudden Qaddhafi sided with the US and turned on North Korea and he was a good guy. Nopity. He was still a bad guy. Some DUers had a case of double whiplash, as they went from not liking him to liking him (when Bush II approved of him) and then not liking him (when Obama disapproved).
Didn't like Mubarak. Didn't like Mursi (but thought he had some chance of not being as bad. Some. Not a large change. But > 0). Don't like al-Sisi.
Still, like IS, not a burning issue. It can lead to change. It will have to change. But only when the majority of people on the ground want it to change. It's like some of the religious wars in Europe: Until there's something that affects the thinking of a large segment of society, you're going to get the tribalism and religious/ethnic warfare. If you stopped all of the wars, if you stopped the triggers for the Reformation and for the Enlightenment and tried to impose them from the top down they'd have failed.
IS will burn itself out. Or it'll be another Islamic Expansion, one that "we" can oppose, and as it sweeps across N. Africa, Asia Minor, and West Asia with its pillage and oppression it'll be dealt with. And perhaps it'll have the same kind of chilling effect among the losers that WWII had on some kinds of virulent nationalism. Because if an ideology's supporters aren't forced to face that they've been defeated, the attitude typically is that somehow they were wronged and victimized and haven't been given their due. And humiliation is worse for peace than ideology.