groundzero, Syria is not Libya or Egypt. The Muslim Brotherhood although active in Syria is not the central player it is in Egypt. Assad is under threat from many sides and it looks like he will be the casualty of a civil war. But his regime will not be replaced initially by a religious group like the Brotherhood. In Syria the political currents are many and strong and I think more important than religious ones. Russia and Iran actively backing Assad. Opposed to him are Saudi Arabia and his previous ally Turkey. The Turkish involvement looks odd but may be the result of pressure being applied to Turkey by the USA. Anyway all of the global powers have vital interests in Syria, so they will not let some unruly fanatics walk away with the prize.
The USA can win a military wars; it just can’t win the peace, which is constantly being undermined by Iran and similar minded Islamic groups. Their problem is that they are up against opponents that they previously failed to adequately understand, but now do. Their main opponent is now Iran. Iran is a theocracy; some would say a fanatical theocracy. I believe that it is a regime that is a misunderstood sophisticated centre of resistance to all things western. By being as constantly belligerent provocatively anti-Western they have become the leader in Islamic world of opposition all things Western. Their religious political and military tentacles are active in all Middle Eastern states. Other than their obvious proxies Hamas and Hezbollah they have material links with all of the Islamist parties and resistance groups. They are the main reason why the US has not been more successful in Iraq and Afghanistan. The more the West pressures them the more self justified and stronger they have become. They are the biggest winner from the Arab spring, a trend that will continue until all of the moderate countries of the Middle East have become truly Islamic and beholden to Tehran. The USA is not losing its battles because it is run by clowns, it is losing because Iran is a much more effective opponent than they previously realised.
Free will My statement “Democracy is a philosophy that is alien to Islam” stands on its own.
It is incorrect to say that many Western nations are led by Christian parties. There are none of significance. There are a few parties, which have the word ‘Christian’ in their name such as Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU) party, but these are not religious parties, they are based on Christian principles but essentially that are liberal secular parties. Islamist parties are fundamentally different. Islamist parties are at their very core religious entities. They are expressions of Islam, established and nurtured to bring about societies based on Islamic principles, doctrines and often Shariah law. At the centre of their philosophy is that the ultimate authority is Allah and no man’s (or woman’s) views have any weight if they contradict the word of Allah. There are no material Christian parties on the planet who are remotely this religious. The two cannot be compared.
