The Rise of ISIS in the Modern World

The monumental rise of ISIS really confuses me.  How does a group that openly slaughters any who they don’t approve of, get so many supporters and followers?  How is it that no one has stood up to them militarily after months of open threats and demonstrations of cruelty and brutality?  They have picked fights with the US, Russia, Iraq, Syria, Iran, Lebanon, and so many other nations and people groups.

 

Being so opposed to the world community at large, where do they get their support from?  How are there so many people out there capable of supporting what ISIS stands for?  And do those people have a right to live?  How far should the freedom to believe what one wants extend?  Is there a limit to the types of beliefs that we should respect?  I do wonder how much of what I hear about ISIS is actually true.  There are constantly stories circulating about them executing hundreds of soldiers who had surrendered.  Now I am not a soldier, so it may not be my place to say this, but after the first week, it was well known that they were doing this.  Anyone who surrenders to ISIS at this point deserves what they get.  Failure is clearly not an option, and you need to defeat them or die trying.

 

US involvement will be very interesting to observe, due to the political issues surrounding the Middle East.  US leaders have to choose between what is clearly “right” (protecting thousands of innocent lives) with what is “popular” (no further US casualties in the Middle East).  And if they do the “right” thing, who are the right people to do it with?  It is pretty ironic to see the US aligned with Iran and Syria, in this conflict.  Those are the people we usually blame the existence of these kinds of terrorists groups on.  Can they exist without support from rogue states?

Based on the politics of American involvement in Iraq, this also leads to the question of whether elected leaders are supposed to do what their constituents desire, or what they believe is right.  And at what cost to themselves? (In their next election)  Getting re-elected should never be the primary goal of any politician.  But those who are facing term limits, like our re-elected president, don't have that to worry about.  Their only concern in that regard seems to be the legacy they leave behind, which can be both good and bad.  Public perception is not necessarily linked to reality, so decisions made now could be condemned of vindicated far in the future.

 

But it seems pretty obvious that something needs to be done, and it is pretty stunning to me, that it has taken so long for us to respond to what is happening.  And while international cooperation will help in solving the problem, I will admit that is a bit scary to me, centralizing too much power and control.  The principle of the separation of powers can be applied to different countries as easily as it can be applied to different branches of government, to keep things in check.  We just have to figure out where we believe those lines should be drawn, and fight to maintain them.