• The post you are reporting:
   
  Andrew, the problem is that it is difficult to understand exactly what the 'defeat of ISIS' would consist of.
  
  We are not dealing with either a war between Nation States or even a civil war where eventually some sort of political settlement grants quiescence if not peace.
  
  ISIS is merely the manifestation of Wahabi /Salafi Islamic Terrorism affecting Europeans which can be seen worldwide from Boko Haram in West Africa through to the Mujahedeen Council in Indonesia.
  
  Wahhabism has been spread from our 'best friends' (sic) the Saudis whereas Salafism has both risen and fallen at various times in the history of Islam.
  
  Matters are not helped by our 'new best friends' (sic) the Iranians who are exploiting the Sunni/Shia schism for political ends and backing Hizb ut Tahrir who oppose ISIS (but whose stated aim is the reestablishment of a Caliphate in the Muslim World). Iran's aim is the gain a sphere of influence running from the Lebanon through Syria and Iraq to Iran itself, hence backing for Assad and military aid to Iraq following Obama's disastrous decision to 'bring the troops home'.
  
  When you add into the mix tribal allegiances which transcend borders (some of the enmities between groups in Afghanistan go back hundreds of years) + political pragmatism which means that support is only given to leaders as long as they favour their supporters the future for peace in the region does not look good.
  
  Yes. The world would be better of without ISIS but I don't think we are going to see this in our lifetime.

Report Post

Your Name

Reason