Why?

ISIS_VS_ISILThink About It.  Why?  IS, ISIS, ISIL? Well, what is it? Or should we quote current candidate Clinton, “What difference at this point does it make?”  I wish I knew. Clearly sides have been chosen for the ongoing conflicting references to al Qaeda successors in their active role of destruction and annihilation. For  two weeks we have noticed this seemingly benign inconsistency. The “leader of the free world” plus all the president’s men and women speak of ISIL, pronounced sometimes as eyesl, occasionally as issel. Or as Hillary’s husband might say, “It depends on what the meaning of the word is is”

Actually the dissonance really seems to depend on what the meaning of the acronym ISIL is. Yes, I know, IS is said to be the Islamic State.  ISIS seems to refer to the Islamic state of Iraq and Syria. ISIL more broadly refers to the Islamic state in Iraq and the Levant. Here we have a much more inclusive geographic area, considered to be territories around and near the Mediterranean Sea. Or more philosophically, extending worldwide to all of the lands intended to be affected by this state without a State. That would be a Caliphate.

Upon the death of Mohammed, a new political leader was needed to retain organization and further the founder’s expansive policies. Keeping it in the family and tribe, the first caliph chosen to lead the controlled area or Caliphate was the Prophet’s father-in-law.  Through the 600s successive caliphs led the forced annexing of Syria, Jordan, Palestine, Iraq and Egypt.  Forays were also made into North Africa, Armenia, Persia and more. You might want to recognize, these folks are not kidding around.  Their rhetoric has been and is being matched by their actions and full intentions to fulfill the destiny outlined by their leaders, speaking for their god. It is powerful motivation.  Distant past? Does it remind you a bit of the current apparent plan by mister Putin revanchist policy to take back the “rightful” role of ruler over Russia’s former real estate?

Just to further confuse the issue, the French government has been referring to these loosely affiliated Jihadist groups as Daech (Don’t ask me.)  As early as June, names offered for the Jihadists thought to be confined to Iraq, included Daula, EIIL and more. Maybe ISIS is where the bad guys are, while ISIL is what they’d like to include. Sort of a “state of mind”?

Maybe while we debate the label, it’s the conduct we need to consider.  Some people I respect are fearing Armageddon or Apocalypse. Other’s fear at least loss of life or that of family.  What to do? Nobody seems to really know as they share their ignorance with more heat than light on the subject.  What we call this dreaded threat may not be the point, but until this date it still surprises me that no one has noted this clear separation of press and prez, and asked the President, Why? Think About It.

 More info.   Even more.

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *