The biggest cheerleaders of ISIS are not in countries like Turkey, Pakistan, or Saudi Arabia, but in Israel and Western countries.
An excerpt from, "The Destruction of Islamic State is a Strategic Mistake" By Prof. Efraim Inbar, BESA, August 2, 2016:
The continuing existence of IS serves a strategic purpose. Why help the brutal Assad regime win the Syrian civil war? Many radical Islamists in the opposition forces, i.e., Al Nusra and its offshoots, might find other arenas in which to operate closer to Paris and Berlin. Is it in the West’s interests to strengthen the Russian grip on Syria and bolster its influence in the Middle East? Is enhancing Iranian control of Iraq congruent with American objectives in that country? Only the strategic folly that currently prevails in Washington can consider it a positive to enhance the power of the Moscow-Tehran-Damascus axis by cooperating with Russia against IS.The view put forward by the professor in the article above is not rare in Western think tanks and academia. It is also a very popular opinion in all sectors of Israeli society.
Furthermore, Hizballah – a radical Shiite anti-Western organization subservient to Iran – is being seriously taxed by the fight against IS, a state of affairs that suits Western interests. A Hizballah no longer involved in the Syrian civil war might engage once again in the taking of western hostages and other terrorist acts in Europe.
The Western distaste for IS brutality and immorality should not obfuscate strategic clarity. IS are truly bad guys, but few of their opponents are much better. Allowing bad guys to kill bad guys sounds very cynical, but it is useful and even moral to do so if it keeps the bad guys busy and less able to harm the good guys. The Hobbesian reality of the Middle East does not always present a neat moral choice.
It makes sense that they think this way, but it's ultimately foolish and short-sighted. Birthing international terrorist groups for an immediate strategic advantage turns out bad for everyone involved in the long run.
Israeli leaders sanctioned the creation of Hamas in its early days, and helped give birth to Hezbollah by invading Lebanon, and, now, decades later, they're crying about the threats posed by both groups.
The CIA gave birth to Al-Qaeda in the 1970s, and it is still "trying" to clean up the big mess that they made well into the 21st century.
Do these idiots ever think about the consequences of their actions?
By creating ISIS they have shown that they haven't learned anything from recent history. Or maybe they have, and they want to replicate their past successes.
Funding, training and arming Jihadist terrorists to take down their enemy worked in Afghanistan and Libya, so why not in Syria?
It's at least worth a shot. Saudis have money to burn, and Western corporations have lots of weapons to sell so it's really easy to create as many terror groups as it is required to get the job done.
We have known about the Western-Israeli love affair with ISIS/Daesh for a long time. It is just bizarre to see people like professors, journalists, and think tank analysts openly defend their immoral and insane positions in policy papers, academic journals, and news articles.
It's a better idea to keep quiet if you want ISIS to win in Syria because advocating for terrorism is not kosher.
An excerpt from, "US Covert Support to the Islamic State (ISIS) as a Means to Creating Chaos and Destroying Syria" By Prof Rodrigue Tremblay, Global Research, September 16, 2015:
If the secular al-Assad government is ever toppled and is replaced by one led by fanatical Islamists, and if revenge killings and massacres of the Syrian Christians, Alawites, and Druze ensue—a possible result of the confused imperialistic US-NATO foreign policy—Barack H. Obama and other American and European politicians will have to place a large part of the blame on themselves. This is not a trivial matter.
