This is a problem. Chaotic Evil death cults are, of course, horrid: but they also can be slaughtered with relative impunity. Lawful Evil cults, on the other hand, tend to want to stick around for a while. As we are seeing in the Middle East right now.
While no one is predicting that the Islamic State will become steward of an accountable, functioning state anytime soon, the group is putting in place the kinds of measures associated with governance: issuing identification cards for residents, promulgating fishing guidelines to preserve stocks, requiring that cars carry tool kits for emergencies. That transition may demand that the West rethink its military-first approach to combating the group.
Yes, I’m sure that the slave markets and sacrificial altars are being run with a basic efficiency and attention to detail, too. If I sound exasperated, it’s because I am. I’m partially exasperated at the Obama administration, which decided to just let this situation develop because it somehow figured out how to retroactively lose a war that George W Bush won; and I’m partially exasperated at the author of the article itself, who is apparently determined to somehow gild that particular lily by suggesting that Obama’s incompetence will eventually not matter.
And how am I certain about that? Easy: the author decided to write an article about the situation in Iraq and Syria without once mentioning the Kurds. Who are also setting up a state, while somehow managing not to throw gay people off of buildings and/or burn captured troops alive. The Kurds would also like some of the territory currently controlled by the death cultists. You’d think that even the New York Times would agree that this would be a good thing… if you actually thought that the New York Times has an agenda that aspires to something higher than Protect the Precious.
Yes. I’m really exasperated about this.