i don't know why people ITT are saying "Americans will only support fighting ISIS if x". a solid majority supports sending American troops to fight ISIS, and that's been the case for months.

it's quite the paradox that Iraq War pt. 3 serves US national interests much clearer than the first two, but this war is guaranteed to have a fraction of the force used in the first two.

There's a difference between opinion and political will to do so. I'd say the political will and/or capital isn't there, yet. Though it's hard to say, the questions are usually generic like "Do you support sending troops to fight ISIS?" which we are already doing.

That would've been the case 2-3 years ago. Islamic State has a presence in Syria, Libya, Iraq, Yemen, and the Sinai at this point.

Hue is right, the U.S. population doesn't want a full scale U.S. troop presence esp when we don't see Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Turkey sending troops. At this point I think American public opinion would even support Russian troops.

With the exception of the extremist Muslim population.

Many of them seem to go off to Syria, though.

The grooming of an American girl. A good read through and through of the step by step process to get someone to go to the Islamic State

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/06/28..._r=0&referrer=

this is my point. i have no idea why you guys believe this without any evidence. i think the confusion may be because the way it's worked in the past is a decision is made to commit military force, then there's a media campaign to bring the public along. the opposite is the case with Iraq right now. the public is already there, has been for months, but for a number of reasons Obama has consistently done the bare minimum. you guys are saying 60%+ support deploying the military to destroy ISIS, but don't actually want it done, or they would immediately change their minds when 10k soldiers receive deployment notices?

the baseline for comparison is 500k, and 100k+ for 6 years. i just don't see any circumstances where there's a commitment close to either of those levels, or a deployment to anywhere other than Iraq and Syria.

Similar article where a journalist engaged in a series of online chats with some of the more vocal female ISIS supporters in the twitter/blog world.

The lead story, about the woman who backed out last minute was kind of interesting. Not sure how credible the article can be when all names are changed and there isn't a whole lot to verify.

For some time I've questioned if a lot of the female ISIS twitter supporters were actually real accounts or just part of a propaganda tactic to encourage more men to head over and join ISIS.

I still find it a bit hard to believe that so many young women voluntarily head over there.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-10350998.html

Btw if anyone is curious what a lefty Stephen Colbert would be like, here you go.

Unfortunately it takes a bit of reading because you have to read the original article and then the satirist's take on it, but it's a decent parody. Warning it's British so there are some Britishisms

The original - It’s not the religion that creates terrorists, it’s the politics by Giles Frasier

http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...s-the-politics

The satire - I Weep For The True Victims Of Extremism - The Extremists Themselves by Giles Blazer

http://kingofdawah.tumblr.com/post/1...-extremism-the

and a more serious take on the original

http://www.al-bab.com/blog/2015/june....ce6i6p0r.dpbs

That whole theory of blaming the west falls apart when it doesn't explain why Saudi Arabia funnels so much money into Wahabist mosques around the world.

Tunisia is about to close 80 of them.

I'm glad the world doesn't buy into this garbage narrative any longer about Islam as well as Christianity being a religion of peace. Nonsense.

Well it is partly the West, ISIS is a continuation of the religious anti colonial movements in the early 1900's.

Similarities and contracts between ISIS and the first Arab conquests

Those turrists all appear to be wearing sneaker like foot ware. Can anybody make out the brands?

They look like knockoffs

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/...-10365201.html

Latest vid of the Palmyra executions is oddly striking. Both ISIS and the Kurds seem to be solidifying their positions rather well. Wonder if we'll see a multiple state resolution in Syria and Iraq soon.

Not w/ ISISLAND being one of the states, we won't.

9% of Brits have a favorable opinion of ISIS.

Given 4-5% of Brits are Muslim, you realise that can't be true, right?

The article actually suggests half of all British Muslims are very favourable, then presumably the other half are favourable, and a further 1.5 million non Muslims are favourable. Those percentages are of all Brits, so I assume Muslim children are big IS supporters in the minds of the ****tards over at the Mirror and the ignoramuses who believe them.

The polling done by the mirror was clearly done to be misleading. It was bull****.

I'd bet good money it's how they phrased the question(s).

http://www.icmunlimited.com/data/med...sis_poll-1.pdf

From what you know, please, tell me if you have a very favourable, somewhat favourable, somewhat unfavourable or very unfavourable opinion
of the Islamic State otherwise known as ISIS, or ISIL?

Even 3 or 4% is way too high for a great democracy like the UK.

Americans are lucky to be so far from the middle east, it keeps middle east immigration down, Europe is not so lucky.

Fortunately there aren't big terrorists groups from Mexico and central America, our close proximity immigrant sources.

But it isn't that either.

There is no chance whatsoever it's higher than a fraction of one percent.

There are a bit under 5% of Brits who are Muslim, of which a full third is under fifteen, so adults will be in the region of 3%. Of those about 0.3-0.5 points will be Shia and Kurd. So we are down to about 2.5% ceiling.

It would be crazy to think forty percent of Sunni Muslims in Britain could support a terrorist in regime that's killing other Muslims.

These numbers should be immediately suspicious for obvious reasons.

It was the same thing with the French numbers of supporters of ISIS. If I remember it was higher than the percentage of Muslims. Turns out it was some Russian state controlled survey company or some transparently click bait producing company, I don't remember which.

ICM is Russian financed.

I don't even think it's that big of a deal. In any country you're going to get some small percentage of people who are grossly uninformed and only has a vague idea of what they are voting on.

I think it's a huge positive that the don't knows and somewhat unfavourable almost entirely moved to very unfavourable.

Guys guys guys,

the global Islampic Caliphate, or the desire to create one, is not a real thing.

Fly said so, therefore you are racist if you think this its true that there is an ideology with popular support of a huge segment of the human population, across wide swaths of the Earth, with manifestations popping up in countries far from the central mass of that ideology in Syria/ Iraq, such as egypt , libya, france, and elsewhere.