Gnostic Bishop wrote:I do not brand them all the same way as all do not practice their religions faithfully.
The essential nature of targeting civilians means it's impossible to prevent suicide attacks no matter how much security is enforced.
It's a mistake to view Isil's brand of Jihad as a majority view among Muslims. The war in Syria came after a famine and grievances against Assad's regime and the Arab spring hopes of popular democracy being called for.
The majority in Syria are Sunni while the rulers are Shia the reverse of Iraq.
Assad cracked down violently provoking armed resistance.Ultimately Isil came as the deliverers of retribution to Assad's regime with a sense of just mission underpinning it.
They have proved to be the most effective militarily and financially and have assimilated or co opted many other opposition militias so that it's almost impossible to speak of moderates opposing Assad.
Isil's Caliphate is a global and territorial project.
The U.S. supported the popular demand for regime change and democracy but was indecisive at crucial moments while all the time Isil was gaining monopoly as the alternative to Assad.
As things stand with the counterbalancing support of various nations neither side can win this war militarily. Isil is a huge problem because of it's extreme religious interpretation and it's theatrical barbarity. Not that Assad is averse to barbarity himself,just not globally.
Iraq was shambolic with the new rulers discriminating against the overthrown minority. It seems though that there were moments if the government had been more equitable that some kind of peaceful coexistence was possible.
Whether the majority of Syrians would really want to be ruled by Isil is an interesting question. Probably not.
Whatever solution the various power brokers in the conflict can agree on I think some kind of election is desirable with lessons learned from Iraq guiding whoever the ruling government is.
Unlikely that Russia will want to lose it's ally in the middle east. It seems though that Isil needs to be defeated at least to the extent that real negotiation is possible.
And also to deflate their fantasy of divinely conferred invincibility and approval.
Copper fastening Assad's regime is not going to work with the extent of popular resentment against it. There's a need for real diplomacy if the various nations and factions are to see beyond their individual interests of various kinds.
In reality the U.S. probably needs to work with Assad's Syrian army against Isil to break the impasse and bring them to a willingness to negotiate in politically meaningful terms.
It can happen. We had decades of sectarian war here in Ireland and eventually both sides had to recognize the futility of endless violent conflict and the need for political agreement.