Obama Is Wrong That ISIS Is 'Not Islamic'

[cali]

All I ask, is that before you freak you actually read the piece. The title really doesn't have all that much to do with the main thrust of the article- which is the conflicting motivations of the Arab nations allied with the U.S.

Let us be plain: President Obama's (and Kerry's) basic premise that America and its allies are fighting a deviant, un-Islamic ideology, which must, and can be delegitimized by gathering together the Sunni Arab world to pronounce it "un-Islamic," simply underlines how little they "know" about ISIS -- with which they are about to go to war.

There is no "true Islam" in Islam. There has never been any central "authority" in Islam that could define such a thing. For better or worse (mostly for the better), Islam wears many faces. But paradoxically, there is one contemporary orientation that does make the big claim of being "true Islam": Wahhabism.

<snip>

John Kerry would be right if he said al Qaeda is an ideology and not a regime. But he is wrong about ISIS. Unlike al Qaeda which only had an "idea," ISIS has a clear purpose: to establish God's "principality" here and now. It has a doctrine for how to bring such a state into existence (drawn from the wars launched to establish the original Islamic State); it holds a territory greater in size than that of Great Britain; it has large financial resources; it has a handsomely equipped army (courtesy of the U.S., the U.K. and others), one that is led by competent commanders; and it has a leader who, many find, spoke well (on the one occasion that he has appeared publicly).

<snip>

A number of Gulf and Arab states have signed up with Washington to fight ISIS, but only because they plan to insert a Trojan Horse into the "war" agenda.

Their troops hidden in the belly of the wooden "horse" are gathered -- not to fight ISIS -- but to fight a quite different war. They want to turn it into a renewed offensive against President Assad and Syria. Indeed, at their preliminary summit in Jeddah, the Arab States agreed to a new Arab security architecture that would subvert the "war on ISIS" into war not just on ISIS, but also on President Assad and all Islamists (plainly they hope to pull the West into a larger war with the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Hezbollah, etc.). Leading Saudi commentator, Jamal Khashoggi made the Saudi plan clear in a recent op-ed:

"We can thus say that eliminating ISIS also calls for the elimination of Assad ... The operation must target Moscow's ally in Damascus and topple him or pave the way to toppling him. Perhaps this is the logical explanation as to why Saudi Arabia approved training camps for the moderate Syrian opposition. It's tantamount to declaring an indirect war on the Syrian regime ... The Jeddah alliance is everyone's opportunity for a new beginning. It is not limited to its immediate task of eliminating ISIS but also includes the possibility of expanding towards reforming the situation in Iraq and Syria."

<snip>

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alastair-crooke/obama-isis-not-islamic_b_5843830.html

[CJCRANE]

1. It's like the original Iraq War. The goal remained the same but the excuses kept changing.

The opinions of the citizenry of the various countries involved are superfluous.

[cali]

2. yes. the similarities are many.

it's already a mess and its barely started.

[CJCRANE]

3. What's worse is that there is even no pretense of spreading "liberal democracy" anymore.

We're going to train up some religious fighters and hope they're less extreme than the other religious fighters.

[NightWatcher]

4. just as Westboro Baptist Church is not representative of Baptists

I believe this is the point that he was trying to make.

[CJCRANE]

6. The thing I dislike about the Bush era onwards

is the endless debates about christianity and islam.

Separation of church and state should mean that people are free to believe whatever they like in the private sphere but uphold and be beholden to universal secular values in the political sphere.

There are so many different varieties of religion: liberal, moderate, conservative, fundamentalist etc. None of them are consistent.

[grahamhgreen]

11. Whatever happened with their trip to Iraq?

[bhikkhu]

5. In the same way that the Westboro Church is not christian

as much as they wave the bible and bluster.

[cali]

7. Westboro is a poor example. Fundamentalist Christianity

is a better one. And it is an aspect of Christianity, just as ISIS- and Wahabism are aspects of Christianity. Westboro represents a couple of dozen people. Fundamentalist Christian sects and ISIS/Wahabism represent millions. significant difference.

[YarnAddict]

8. People of any religion

are free to define themselves in the context of their own beliefs.

It drives me nuts to see atheists announce that fundies aren't Christian. Bullshit!! If they say they are Christian, then they are Christian, and it isn't up to anyone else to judge them.

If ISIS says they are Islamic, then they are Islamic.

[Mr Dixon]

9. SMH

I never saw a reason for War; I mean beheading people is terrible but not a precursor to War.

[TwilightGardener]

10. We're not at war because of beheadings. We're at war because this terror group

took over a third of Iraq and threatens our business and our people there.

[grahamhgreen]

12. By business, do you mean oil interests?

[TwilightGardener]

15. Yup. Let's be real.

[grahamhgreen]

13. Assad is the goal, I believe.

[CJCRANE]

14. Precisely. That was the point of the First Amendment

and the wall of separation between church and state and all the other things the Founding Fathers talked about.

No one can define what is and is not "true" religion and, if you try you'll never succeed, because you'll go round in circles in theological debate and physical conflict just as Europe did for a thousand years.

[librechik]

16. they're muslims like Fred Phelps is a Christian

i.e., yeah, not really. They are extremists who don't fit in with the mainstream, of Islamic religion today, and their focus is political, not religious.

[cali]

17. Wahabism/ISIS represents millions. Westboro represents... dozens.

As I said in another post, Christian Fundamentalism is a better comparison than Westboro.

The reality is that both are aspects of their respective religions with significant numbers of adherents- and as Crooke explains, both ISIS and Wahabism hold the same religious tenets.

[librechik]

18. there's millions of evangechristianists, too--Nevertheless a shrinking minority

like Wahabists. Only the blanket media coverage forces us to be aware of these global kooks. I suspect the Media Six make money off exploiting the extreme behavior of both movements, otherwise we would be barely aware of their existence.

[hifiguy]

20. Very true.

Obama knows that his statement is false but he can't tell the truth without causing a gigantic stink. Sam Harris just posted an interesting piece on his blog last week about this very thing. And Wahhabism is both barbaric and insane. It is a cancer on civilization itself.

[greytdemocrat]

19. Geeze

Of course ISIS is Islamic.

I honestly don't know what POTUS and Kerry are babbling
about saying it isn't.

It just makes them look stupid IMHO.

[Orsino]

22. It's a way of reminding us that although ISIL is Islamic...

...Islam does not equal ISIL. As far as it was intended to go, it's a fine sentiment that might in some small way help to undercut rabid American Islamophobia. Mainly, it's a sop to Muslim nations that ally with us.

The president really should have said it more pithily: ISIL is not Islam.

[Dems to Win]

21. ISIS has plenty of Koran quotes that justify their actions

The ISIS version of Islam is quite similar to the Saudi version, including beheadings.

I am disgusted by Kerry and Obama pretending that ISIS is not Islamic, as a kind of kowtowing to the Saudis. I'm not buying what they are spouting. It does feel like we being lied into a mideast war once again.

[MisterP]

23. aren't they half Baathist as well?