I kind of see it as similar to gang problems here in the U.S., Cental and South America and Asia. Disaffected and desperate young people with no job or anything else to do are easy targets for recruitment into their ranks. Both organizations use violence to intimidate, initiate and enrich themselves.
The one thing that differs between the two is that groups like ISIL use religious intolerance as a recruitment tool.
They see a holy war against the U.S. (and our allies that have joined the fight), and it's our differences that fuel the flames. We want a democratic, modern and tolerant Middle East. And our way of life is looked down upon because of perceived open mindedness toward skimpy outfits for women, gays, alcohol, idolatry,...
To them we sin in so many ways we are called infidels. And yet we try to obtain influence in their homelands and ally ourselves with some pretty bad people who are their leaders. This is why I believe that if we have a presence there they will have a mechanism for enlistment into the fight. We say, "We will not stop until this threat is destroyed." And it's a metastasizing threat the more we get involved. Are we trying to kill them all? Is that possible? Is a war winnable when you're fighting a movement?
Back to the gang analogy; what I see a lot in poor neighborhoods globally are huge masses of children of all ages. To me it never made sense to have children when one cannot afford them. It's wrong in so many ways to raise a child without access to proper nutrition and education. And yet many do.
When a child grows up without all that support they look for it in other ways. Being paid to take up arms becomes more attractive and fighting the infidels brings purpose, not unlike gangs taking care of their own and fighting 'the man.'
To me the solutions lie in the areas of policy, interventionism (or lack thereof) and understanding, which since humans are holding the ball I guess there's no workable solution.
It's the same young, jobless, desperate men (mostly) who join gangs and terrorist groups. Therefore I believe that if the world's wealth was shared more {gasp} both problems would be diminished.
Can't we can figure this out without the collateral damage of our bombing campaigns and all the recruits they garner?
Edit: Also if moderate Muslims are seen fighting the extremists rather than Christians, moderation could gain a bigger foothold.
The one thing that differs between the two is that groups like ISIL use religious intolerance as a recruitment tool.
They see a holy war against the U.S. (and our allies that have joined the fight), and it's our differences that fuel the flames. We want a democratic, modern and tolerant Middle East. And our way of life is looked down upon because of perceived open mindedness toward skimpy outfits for women, gays, alcohol, idolatry,...
To them we sin in so many ways we are called infidels. And yet we try to obtain influence in their homelands and ally ourselves with some pretty bad people who are their leaders. This is why I believe that if we have a presence there they will have a mechanism for enlistment into the fight. We say, "We will not stop until this threat is destroyed." And it's a metastasizing threat the more we get involved. Are we trying to kill them all? Is that possible? Is a war winnable when you're fighting a movement?
Back to the gang analogy; what I see a lot in poor neighborhoods globally are huge masses of children of all ages. To me it never made sense to have children when one cannot afford them. It's wrong in so many ways to raise a child without access to proper nutrition and education. And yet many do.
When a child grows up without all that support they look for it in other ways. Being paid to take up arms becomes more attractive and fighting the infidels brings purpose, not unlike gangs taking care of their own and fighting 'the man.'
To me the solutions lie in the areas of policy, interventionism (or lack thereof) and understanding, which since humans are holding the ball I guess there's no workable solution.
It's the same young, jobless, desperate men (mostly) who join gangs and terrorist groups. Therefore I believe that if the world's wealth was shared more {gasp} both problems would be diminished.
Can't we can figure this out without the collateral damage of our bombing campaigns and all the recruits they garner?
Edit: Also if moderate Muslims are seen fighting the extremists rather than Christians, moderation could gain a bigger foothold.
Last edited:
Facebook
Twitter