[Saddam Hussein]

You know, I wonder where he got his name.  It's certainly weird looking to my American eyes.  Is it some kind of Hebrew or did he just randomly hit keys and call it a day?  What do you guys think?

It probably just comes down to it being an incredibly stereotypically Jewish name.  He might as well have called himself Rabbi Emmanuel "Jew" Abraham Jewstein Israelberg.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

My father's name was Avraham. He named me Ya'akov. Thus Ya'akov ben Avraham or literally, "Jacob son of Abraham". As I do recall, when signing up, the sign-in refused to take apostrophes. IF I lived in Israel (I don't) this would be my legal name. But my secular name is my legal name is this country (the USA). There are several different ways of transliterating the name "Ya'akov". Yakov. Yaakov. Yaacov, are 4 of them.

[Eddy Baby]

I don't see why we're arguing about his name. It's clearly a Hebrew name, so I'm not sure why everyone's sitting around going, 'I don't know anything about Hebrew, but that doesn't look like Hebrew to me.'

[Vindictus]

I just wish this thread was actually about ISIS.

[Eddy Baby]

This link tracks them in real-time

[Vindictus]

That alone was more humorous than the last 20 pages of trolling.

[Rushy]

ISIS exists because war breeds radicalism. It's the same reason there are still warlords in Africa. It's also a pretty basic chapter in Niccolo Machiavelli's The Prince when he talks about war being a career. If war is all you know, then war is all you will do.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

IRUSH, you're quite correct, of course. God, its been a LONG time since I've read The Prince.

[Vindictus]

ISIS exists because war breeds radicalism. It's the same reason there are still warlords in Africa. It's also a pretty basic chapter in Niccolo Machiavelli's The Prince when he talks about war being a career. If war is all you know, then war is all you will do.

It's a bit more complicated than that.

[Rushy]

It's a bit more complicated than that.

Not really. The whole situation stems from war, even Islam itself is a philosophy that results from extreme turmoil in the region. Religions are often shaped by the area they originate from, not the opposite. This is why if you read the Old Testament in the Bible and then read the New Testament it almost appears to be two separate gods. The Old testament god is similar to Islam's Allah in that they are both war gods. The New Testament god on the other hand was more peaceful (despite many wars brought about by Christianity, most of the New Testaments teaching revolve around peaceful solution to problems).

Thus even though ISIS could be described as a religious radical state, really they would do what they do regardless of religion. Man shapes religion, not the other way around.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

It really depends on how you read the Old Testament. The very early part of it has God being a pretty brutal thunder god, but by the time you get to the later Prophets, he's a much more peaceful, loving deity. The whole business about turning swords into pruning hooks and all that is from Isaiah. And the God of Israel sent Jonah to Nineveh of all places to preach his word, which was heard, to the point that Jonah was pissed when God saved them, and had to be taught a rather sharp lesson by this universal God. There are many other examples I could mention.

So there was an evolution in the Judaic concept of God. Whether or not you believe that was brought about by God, or by the people themselves, is irrelevant to the topic. The fact remains that Judaism in the time of the Prophets thought very differently about God than it did in say, Exodus. By the time you get to Jesus, all of the disciples were Jewish. All the writers of the New Testament were Jews except Luke, and he was a Jew by Choice (a convert).

[Vindictus]

It's a bit more complicated than that.

Not really. The whole situation stems from war, even Islam itself is a philosophy that results from extreme turmoil in the region. Religions are often shaped by the area they originate from, not the opposite. This is why if you read the Old Testament in the Bible and then read the New Testament it almost appears to be two separate gods. The Old testament god is similar to Islam's Allah in that they are both war gods. The New Testament god on the other hand was more peaceful (despite many wars brought about by Christianity, most of the New Testaments teaching revolve around peaceful solution to problems).

Thus even though ISIS could be described as a religious radical state, really they would do what they do regardless of religion. Man shapes religion, not the other way around.

ISIS exists as a direct result of American intervention. If Saddam was never deposed, it is unlikely they would be as powerful as they are right now, at least in Iraq anyway. Don't forget that there are also quite a few westerners among their ranks, many of which had peacefully lived in western countries (sometimes second generations) many years before joining up.

The conflict in Syria served as their genesis, but it was their push into Iraq that made people pay attention.

[Rushy]

ISIS exists as a direct result of American intervention. If Saddam was never deposed, it is unlikely they would be as powerful as they are right now, at least in Iraq anyway. Don't forget that there are also quite a few westerners among their ranks, many of which had peacefully lived in western countries (sometimes second generations) many years before joining up.

The conflict in Syria served as their genesis, but it was their push into Iraq that made people pay attention.

Okay, now I'm confused. You're 100% agreeing with what I've said yet you gladly informed me the situation is more complicate than what I've previously claimed.

ISIS is a direct result of intervention in the middle east. I'm not so sure even more intervention is going to resolve the situation.

[Vindictus]

ISIS exists as a direct result of American intervention. If Saddam was never deposed, it is unlikely they would be as powerful as they are right now, at least in Iraq anyway. Don't forget that there are also quite a few westerners among their ranks, many of which had peacefully lived in western countries (sometimes second generations) many years before joining up.

The conflict in Syria served as their genesis, but it was their push into Iraq that made people pay attention.

Okay, now I'm confused. You're 100% agreeing with what I've said yet you gladly informed me the situation is more complicate than what I've previously claimed.

ISIS is a direct result of intervention in the middle east. I'm not so sure even more intervention is going to resolve the situation.

I think the answer is just a bit more nuanced than 'lel war made ISIS'. In the most basic sense, it was 2 different wars that got them to their current status.

[Rushy]

I think the answer is just a bit more nuanced than 'lel war made ISIS'. In the most basic sense, it was 2 different wars that got them to their current status.

Why would you poke fun at the statement that war made ISIS, then afterwards state that war caused ISIS?

[Vindictus]

I think the answer is just a bit more nuanced than 'lel war made ISIS'. In the most basic sense, it was 2 different wars that got them to their current status.

Why would you poke fun at the statement that war made ISIS, then afterwards state that war caused ISIS?

Because their roots are in other extremist groups that have existed for a long time, it was only in the Syrian war that they went independent. Their incursion into Iraq was only so successful because of Iraq 2 10 years ago. Conflict has expanded their influence and had a hand in their creation, but there are many more factors contributing as well. They get their funding and arms from various states that are actually western allies.

[Rushy]

Or, in other words, one might say that war made ISIS.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

IRUSH, almost certainly.

[Vindictus]

Technically Al-Qaeda made ISIS

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

IRUSH, he's right on that one.