I once met a woman on the Syrian border who had spent several decades in Tadmor prison in Palmyra only emerging when ISIS had taken the town. I cannot verify her claim but she said she gave birth to her child in its dark dungeons underground, that child did not see the sunshine for seven years, and whilst she hated the Islamic State, she hated the Assad regime more. Nevertheless, for the region and the international community, Assad, is the better partner. He is a known quantity, better the devil you know as opposed to rebels with Jihadists in their midst. He can be dealt with using tried and tested policies of the past. In many ways, the Jihadis present themselves to be a greater conundrum in the region and indeed in the Muslim world as a whole. Assad is slowly but surely corralling the rebels and Jihadis into that province to finish them off. I doubt however, that he will, if the example of the Nigerian President Muhammad Buhari’s is anything to go by.
Zane, thank you. 1. I don't believe that any version of Islamic State will satisfy them precisely because they are puritans/purists, which means there will always be men within this group who will deem it not to be 'islamic' enough. I don't think Mecca and Medina need be part of that, as historically many have been set up outside of the Hejaz. The final, question, I don't think they will be contented by a Muslim version of Mossad etc. Remember AQ was meant to be that Special-Ops vanguard that could go in and out to support the Pan-Islamic community. Thank you for reading Zane.
Do you believe there is any version of an Islamic state that would satisfy these men and undo the "humilaited position". Like the Zionist fixation on Jerusalem and the Land of Judah would this hypothetical state have to be centered on Mecca and Medina or could any other location fill this role? Would any form of revolution or reform in the Saudi state provide the opportunity to scrath that itch, could these men be contented by joining some Islamic version of the Mossad, with clandestine state-sponsored missions to right percieved crimes against the Ummah, targeted special-ops with less collateral unlike their current style of indisriminate bombings?
PS: A deep thanks for your efforts in shedding light on the psyche of Salafi-Jihadism
Zane, thank you. 1. I don't believe that any version of Islamic State will satisfy them precisely because they are puritans/purists, which means there will always be men within this group who will deem it not to be 'islamic' enough. I don't think Mecca and Medina need be part of that, as historically many have been set up outside of the Hejaz. The final, question, I don't think they will be contented by a Muslim version of Mossad etc. Remember AQ was meant to be that Special-Ops vanguard that could go in and out to support the Pan-Islamic community. Thank you for reading Zane.
Do you believe there is any version of an Islamic state that would satisfy these men and undo the "humilaited position". Like the Zionist fixation on Jerusalem and the Land of Judah would this hypothetical state have to be centered on Mecca and Medina or could any other location fill this role? Would any form of revolution or reform in the Saudi state provide the opportunity to scrath that itch, could these men be contented by joining some Islamic version of the Mossad, with clandestine state-sponsored missions to right percieved crimes against the Ummah, targeted special-ops with less collateral unlike their current style of indisriminate bombings?
PS: A deep thanks for your efforts in shedding light on the psyche of Salafi-Jihadism