Time for me to don my flame retardant suite, because I know I'm about to be burned for speaking my mind on this subject.
I'll start with a very brief history lesson for those that aren't aware. I apologize for those that already know this. For the participation of Sunni assistance in overthrowing the Ottoman empire in World War 1, the Sunni's were promised rule over the specific land they were majority in after Allied victory.
In a conspiracy theory which ended up being revealed through an unlikely twist of fate, it turned out the Britain, French and Russia actually under the table agreed to restructure the borders of the Middle East in a colonial fashion to make the area easy to control, and further divided these newly created countries between themselves. This was known as the Sykes-Picot Agreement and the only reason we know about this underhanded conspiracy theory is because the Bolsheviks rose to power and overthrew the Russian Tsar, and revealed it to the world. If you are interested in conspiracy theories, this is a great thing to read about. It was only revealed through unlikely circumstances.
Since World War 1 and the fall of the Ottoman Empire, the rulers of these Middle Eastern countries have been horrible, brutal dictators. The reason for this is precisely because of these borders drawn post World War 1 by the Sykes-Picot Agreement.
British colonalism 101: Draw up borders where there is a very sizable majority of a group of people. Prop up and support the minority group to rule over the majority with the economic and military assistance provided to them. The minority group will become a puppet state, as they depend on the assistance of the foreign power to keep their rule over the majority. The minority group must rule with an iron fist to estabilish themselves as the rulers. This obviousily further divides the hatred between the majority and minority groups, allowing the cycle of violence and ease of ruling to continue.
As long as the borders continue the way they are in these countries, I believe this violence will continue. Intervention and bombing ISIS won't stop the cycle of violence. Nothing has stopped the violence for the last 100 years. There is either war, revolutions, or brutal dictators commiting state sanctioned murder and torture to keep the peace.
Keep in mind that although we are only hearing about the atrocities commited by ISIS, all sides are commiting atrocities (albeit not on the scale ISIS seems to be). Also keep in mind that ISIS does not want to conquer all of Syria and Iraq, they want to restructure the borders that will seperate the Sunni, Shia (who will presumably join with Iran), and Kurds (who has land that ISIS is not claiming).
I hate ISIS. I hate the horror and death they promote. I hate what they are doing to innocents. But I hate those that came before ISIS, infact I hate everyone that has ruled that entire region over the last 100 years, and if our mentality continues the way it does, I'm sure I will hate the next people after ISIS.
I guess what I'm trying to say is, if we truly want the cycle of death to continue, maybe we should stop promoting military action and let the dice fall where they may. The murder of incubator babies are horrible, but also used against the public as an emotional tool to support these wars. These wars which are lobbied and funded by the richest industries in the United States.
One other thing I'd like to touch on. I find it disconcerting that the US financed and provided weapons to Al Nusra front to fight against the Syrian government. Al Nusra front ended up becoming ISIS. ISIS is fighting using US provided weapons and was previousily financed by the United States. Also, "saving the innocents from ISIS" completely flipped public opinion of non-intervention into Syria. Now everyone is crying that something must be done and the war drums beat once more.
This almost rhymes with the support of the first Gulf War, where Saddam was supported entirely by the United States, including providing the very gases that Saddam used on the Shia's which were later used as evidence to villify him, and not entirely discouraged to declare war on Kuwait then using this as casus belli to declare war.
Not to get too conspiratorial, but I believe there is a lot we don't know about US Foreign policy and the real reasons these situations occur. Perhaps we should stop turning to our emotional brain when they do.
