The above article from the New York Times is really interesting. It is not only about ISIS’s deft use of modern media, despite their often gruesome primitive behavior towards other human beings, but also gives one a sense of what their goals seem to be. This is one of the better articles I’ve read in trying to understand them.
A key paragraph:
A review of its prodigious output in print and online reveals a number of surprises. ISIS propaganda, for instance, has strikingly few calls for attacks on the West, even though its most notorious video, among Americans, released 12 days ago, showed the beheading of the American journalist James Foley, threatened another American hostage, and said that American attacks on ISIS “would result in the bloodshed” of Americans. This diverged from nearly all of ISIS’s varied output, which promotes its paramount goal: to secure and expand the Islamic state. Experts say that could change overnight, but for now it sharply distinguishes ISIS from Al Qaeda, which has long made attacks on the West its top priority.
What I find interesting about that paragraph is that although I believe there is a case to be made for international intervention against ISIS, it seems to be more because of their crimes against humanity then them actually posing a threat to our country. If we are going to do something about them, I believe the only way to do it is through a large coalition.