Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
In my mind, Syria is a problem for one reason: it's such a disastrously poorly run country that terrorists, ISIS, have managed to get a decent foothold there. Assad is a prick, but he's not a problem, other than his ineptitude as a leader and governor, which is why ISIS has taken hold in his country.
From an American standpoint, getting rid of ISIS in Syria can be done in two ways:
The important thing to note about ISIS is that it's a heinous ideology, just as, for example, white supremacy is. Accordingly, it's unlikely in the foreseeable future (10 years at least) that it's possible to eradicate it. Moreover, some of ISIS' goals are simply incompatible with everyone else's.
- Get rid of Assad and replace him with a more capable leader who realizes ISIS is as bad for Syria as it is for everyone else who isn't "into" ISIS. Then clobber ISIS in Syria.
- Do what one can to reduce ISIS' strength, numbers and control in Syria.
So what's my solution proposal? Everyone, that is nations, who're non-ISIS, not "into" ISIS, must change such that the things that catalyze "people on the cusp" to lean ever closer to ISIS are not present in the "way the world works." Why do people join ISIS? According to Quantum Research, people who "fight" for ISIS fall into nine categories:
- Status seekers: Intent on improving “their social standing” these people are driven primarily by money “and a certain recognition by others around them.”
- Identity seekers: Prone to feeling isolated or alienated, these individuals “often feel like outsiders in their initial unfamiliar/unintelligible environment and seek to identify with another group.” Islam, for many of these provides “a pre-packaged transnational identity.”
- Revenge seekers: They consider themselves part of a group that is being repressed by the West or someone else.
- Redemption seekers: They joined ISIS because they believe it vindicates them, or ameliorates previous sinfulness.
- Responsibility seekers: Basically, people who have joined or support ISIS because it provides some material or financial support for their family.
- Thrill seekers: Joined ISIS for adventure.
- Ideology seekers: These want to impose their view of Islam on others.
- Justice seekers: They respond to what they perceive as injustice. “The justice seekers’ ‘raison d’être’ ceases to exist once the perceived injustice stops,” the report says.
- Death seekers: These people “have most probably suffered from a significant trauma/loss in their lives and consider death as the only way out with a reputation of martyr instead of someone who has committed suicide.”
I doubt that the ideology seekers will ever be appeased; however, it's quite possible to reduce the appeal of ISIS in the eyes of people seeking tangible outcomes related to things like money, equity, vengeance, identity, and other factors.
A first step in removing the stimuli we can is to invest in getting the "third world" nations brought up to the same standards of living that we see in the West. Quite simply, "fat and happy" people aren't radical and don't want change; they have too much to lose. Look at the majority of the people who run off to join ISIS. They haven't a damn thing to lose, having even less to lose than do the most downtrodden folks in the U.S., and they (in their minds) have everything to gain by joining ISIS. And frankly, from what I've seen, they really aren't any worse off by being in ISIS or dying for ISIS' cause. That's what has to change. The circumstance of life in the places in which those people live has to be converted into something productive so that would-be ISIS adherents are better off not destroying it and the rest of the world that makes it possible than they are by joining ISIS.
You can't go in, destroy the current government and then leave. All you're doing is creating a power vacuum and those who replace the old regime, are quite likely to be the worst sort of radical you can name. That's what happened in Iraq and in Libya. It's how the Ayatollahs took over Iran.
It's why you're now fighting ISIL.
In my mind, Syria is a problem for one reason: it's such a disastrously poorly run country that terrorists, ISIS, have managed to get a decent foothold there. Assad is a prick, but he's not a problem, other than his ineptitude as a leader and governor, which is why ISIS has taken hold in his country.
From an American standpoint, getting rid of ISIS in Syria can be done in two ways:
The important thing to note about ISIS is that it's a heinous ideology, just as, for example, white supremacy is. Accordingly, it's unlikely in the foreseeable future (10 years at least) that it's possible to eradicate it. Moreover, some of ISIS' goals are simply incompatible with everyone else's.
- Get rid of Assad and replace him with a more capable leader who realizes ISIS is as bad for Syria as it is for everyone else who isn't "into" ISIS. Then clobber ISIS in Syria.
- Do what one can to reduce ISIS' strength, numbers and control in Syria.
So what's my solution proposal? Everyone, that is nations, who're non-ISIS, not "into" ISIS, must change such that the things that catalyze "people on the cusp" to lean ever closer to ISIS are not present in the "way the world works." Why do people join ISIS? According to Quantum Research, people who "fight" for ISIS fall into nine categories:
- Status seekers: Intent on improving “their social standing” these people are driven primarily by money “and a certain recognition by others around them.”
- Identity seekers: Prone to feeling isolated or alienated, these individuals “often feel like outsiders in their initial unfamiliar/unintelligible environment and seek to identify with another group.” Islam, for many of these provides “a pre-packaged transnational identity.”
- Revenge seekers: They consider themselves part of a group that is being repressed by the West or someone else.
- Redemption seekers: They joined ISIS because they believe it vindicates them, or ameliorates previous sinfulness.
- Responsibility seekers: Basically, people who have joined or support ISIS because it provides some material or financial support for their family.
- Thrill seekers: Joined ISIS for adventure.
- Ideology seekers: These want to impose their view of Islam on others.
- Justice seekers: They respond to what they perceive as injustice. “The justice seekers’ ‘raison d’être’ ceases to exist once the perceived injustice stops,” the report says.
- Death seekers: These people “have most probably suffered from a significant trauma/loss in their lives and consider death as the only way out with a reputation of martyr instead of someone who has committed suicide.”
I doubt that the ideology seekers will ever be appeased; however, it's quite possible to reduce the appeal of ISIS in the eyes of people seeking tangible outcomes related to things like money, equity, vengeance, identity, and other factors.
A first step in removing the stimuli we can is to invest in getting the "third world" nations brought up to the same standards of living that we see in the West. Quite simply, "fat and happy" people aren't radical and don't want change; they have too much to lose. Look at the majority of the people who run off to join ISIS. They haven't a damn thing to lose, having even less to lose than do the most downtrodden folks in the U.S., and they (in their minds) have everything to gain by joining ISIS. And frankly, from what I've seen, they really aren't any worse off by being in ISIS or dying for ISIS' cause. That's what has to change. The circumstance of life in the places in which those people live has to be converted into something productive so that would-be ISIS adherents are better off not destroying it and the rest of the world that makes it possible than they are by joining ISIS.
I have a solution to the cost of the wallAll right folks, let's hear from you: What should the US do?
I'll outline NK later.
Your parents were as psychotic as you...not news. You are a poster child for abortion.Written like a true sociopathic imbecile. That the best you can come up with or are you simply too stupid to think about anything other than mass murder?
I grew up with two younger brothers. My parents had a simple way of dealing with arguments over "shared" items or over ownership of items.....
If we couldn't work it out quickly and efficiently between ourselves.... the item got DESTROYED, while we watched.
Your Welcome. The Civil War has too many players with opposite goals. Being funded and armed from too many groups. Which keeps the conflict alive.
Great chart! Thank you Eagle
Bingo.............Winner Winner Chicken dinner...........ding ding ding. LOLThey aren't really ruled by the Quran though...they ignore big portions of it....
What they are though, is a Doomsday Cult.
At the moment, I can think of multiple emerging serious world events that Trump is going to have to deal with. Everyone is happy to criticize Trump and Obama for acting or not acting. But that ignores the reality - in which simple solutions are not going to solve complex problems.
Two leading contenders for the Big World Problem of the year are: Syria and NK.
Let's look at Syria:
Syria is into it's 6th year of Civil War. Now, to put this in perspective - civil wars are the worst wars, long, bloody, destructive. The Congo has been in and out of a civil war that has been deemed the bloodiest conflict ever since about 1960. No one has been able to "solve it" nor is it much in the news despite the incredible brutality and the use of child soldiers. If the Congo can't be solved...how are we going to "fix" Syria?
Modern Syria is a product of artificial borders from the division of the Ottoman Empire by the national powers of the time. It' forced together different and opposing ethnic, tribal and religious groups under a strong man regime. The regime itself was of a minority population, and kept divisions alive in order to maintain power. You have other minorities allied with the regime because the regime protected them in exchange for loyalty. An then you have others who have long been discrimminated against or even outright attacked by the regime. The entire mess is held together by a ruthless dictator. That's the readers digest version.
Part 2 - popular uprising. Short version: Assad brutally attacked peaceful demonstrators demanding political change. That was the shot that started the spiral downward. Assad's brutality against his own people became more and more apparent as the conflict grew. ISIS found a foothold in the people that had previously suffered under Assad's rule. Fast forward to now: Syria is split into regime controlled territory, "rebel" controlled territory (and "rebel" means diverse groups with differing agendas and loyalties) and ISIS controlled territory.
Part 3 - lets make it even more complicated! We have Outside Interests. Russia has involved itself - and is propping up Assad. Russia has it's own interests and agenda not the least of which is to be a world leader in the global arena. Add to that, Iran - another wanna-be world player, or at least a major regional power. Finally - we have Turkey, who's borders with Syria and problems with the Kurds create yet another agenda in the conflict.
Part 4 - all seem to be supporting different factions in the conflict turning Syria into what I think is a proxy war for outside powers.
All right folks, let's hear from you: What should the US do?
I'll outline NK later.
