SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Pakistani attorney and author Rafia Zakaria wrote an op-ed in Al Jazeera America about the Islamic extremists' war on fun, including sports, music, even dining in a fine restaurant. Zakaria points out that this apparent obsession predates the existence of ISIS by several decades (at least); he suspects this is a big reason why the attackers chose Paris, renowned worldwide for its brilliant culture and joie de vivre.
Terrorism’s targeting of the merry is universal and indiscriminate, a division of the world between those who wish to live and laugh and hope and those who kill and destroy. The latter are deadly and relentless, and they have already squeezed out the mirth from too many of the world’s cities, from Karachi, Kabul and Baghdad to Nairobi and Beirut.
Zakaria experienced this aspect of terror firsthand. A high school friend had just passed a big exam, and was out celebrating with his family at a restaurant in Karachi, Pakistan, when terrorists struck.
Al Jazeera America provides a separate analysis warning that military action alone cannot defeat ISIS (aka ISIL), which of course is not a "nation" in the traditional sense, but more of a guerilla outfit like Al Qaeda, that opportunistically seized a stronghold in chaotic regions of Syria and Iraq. The piece's author, political scientist Rami G. Khouri, recommends that both the West and Muslim nations of the Middle East spend more resources on addressing economic and political problems facing impoverished youths who are potentially attracted by the ISIS' recruiting pitch:
If the underlying threats to ordinary citizens’ lives in autocratic Arab-Islamic societies remain unaddressed — from jobs, water and health insurance, to free elections, a credible justice system and corruption — the flow of recruits to movements like ISIL or something even worse will persist and even accelerate.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Anne Nonymous on Monday November 16 2015, @03:06PM
> WHO DO THEY SELL IT TO?
> Who buys oil from IS?
The FT had a good story on this very question last month: here [ft.com] and here [ft.com].
(Score: 2) by fritsd on Monday November 16 2015, @06:58PM
The article was fascinatingto read, but I don't believe at all the reason given why that 6 km of oil trucks wasn't bombed because "that would make life harder for the 10 million people living there if they didn't have diesel".
Now the money is flowing *into* the area, and the Daesh leaders buy more weapons and more terror attacks.
If the poor farmers have to buy diesel from *outside*, then either the money is flowing *out of* the area, draining Daesh funds, or the farmers themselves flee, draining Daesh tax income and strength (and increasing the European refugee problem, granted).
Also, we're talking about 10 million poor Syrian farmers in a desert. Since when does the Financial Times care about the poverty of Syrian farmers in a desert??? Was there ever an FT article about the Iraq war that mentioned "and the x million Iraqis in province Anbar on the other side of the Syrian border have been impoverished because X, Y and Z coalition attacks"?