Instead of indulging in yet another lame exercise in partisan finger-pointing, perhaps people should just be glad that western culture is no longer in the dark ages as is Arab.
We did not create these people. We have nothing to do with their primitive culture. Their religion is their own as is their practice of marrying their close family members, and although we did create situations where the strong-armed leaders that kept some of the barbarism in check, the leaders, themselves were also barbaric and so the motivations for removing them were not entirely dishonorable whether it was Bush doing so in Iraq, or the Arab spring occurring during the Obama administration.
If we are guilty of anything, that guilt lies in the hubris of thinking we could somehow turn them into us or that we are somehow responsible for everything they do. We aren't. Instead of all this internecine squabbling between those who supported a Republican president who forcefully removed one strong armed leader or a Democratic president who aided in removing others -- squabbling that seems more the result of a conditioned response than rational analysis -- wouldn't we be better off to look at the situation in terms of culture, instead?
The gulf between republicans and democrats is a stream. The gulf between the Arab world and the west is an ocean.
.
So the US interference hasn't had an impact, not only on Islam, but also on the manner in which things happen?
I'd say it does. I'm not defending Islam, I don't like religion at all, and I think Islam isn't great. However there's a big difference in Islam around the world. Turkey for example, and Islam in countries where you might not expect Islam to be, like China, southern Africa etc is on the same level as the other religions or perhaps even higher.
The problem is, if you take countries in the Middle East, they were suffering from the break up of the Ottoman Empire and trying to go their own way. The British had a major (negative) part to play in all of this. Making Iraq in a manner which wasn't going to be beneficial for anyone but the west, for example.
But then we have interference in Iran, and other Middle Eastern countries. And it's not difficult to see why the US has interfered in these countries, and anyone in any country who suffered such interference would be more likely to turn radical.
The US's power and influence over the world, especially post WW2, the Cold War period, saw such battles over which countries would be on which side, not leaving room for individual development of countries in their own manner, the funding of Israel and allowing Israel to use such money to basically do what they like without recourse. This all has had an impact on Jihad, the modern version grew out of the British attempts at controlling Afghanistan.
Islam knows they can't compete on a financial and technological level, so they have to find other ways, and this is Jihad, it works. ISIS want the US in Syria and Iraq because it would allow them to fight on a more level playing field. They can't cope in the air, only on land. Which is why they can cause so many problems in Iraq and Syria.
To suggest all their own problems are their own making is merely to avoid the truth.
This doesn't mean they don't also cause their own problems which is the accusation I guess will be flung back, but stability is hard to come by when A) you know someone's breathing down your neck and B) you know your own country is never really going to be your own, if you try, you'll get invaded or see your leader toppled or whatever.
