The irrepressible Tom Friedmann, inventor of the famous Friedmann Unit, vanguard of provocative and out-of-the-box political thought opines in a recent piece titled "Go Ahead, Ruin My Day" that while awful, ISIS is also useful:
"Now I despise ISIS as much as anyone, but let me just toss out a different question: Should we be arming ISIS? Or let me ask that differently: Why are we, for the third time since 9/11, fighting a war on behalf of Iran?
In 2002, we destroyed Iran’s main Sunni foe in Afghanistan (the Taliban regime). In 2003, we destroyed Iran’s main Sunni foe in the Arab world (Saddam Hussein). But because we failed to erect a self-sustaining pluralistic order, which could have been a durable counterbalance to Iran, we created a vacuum in both Iraq and the wider Sunni Arab world. That is why Tehran’s proxies now indirectly dominate four Arab capitals: Beirut, Damascus, Sana and Baghdad.
ISIS, with all its awfulness, emerged as the homegrown Sunni Arab response to this crushing defeat of Sunni Arabism — mixing old pro-Saddam Baathists with medieval Sunni religious fanatics with a collection of ideologues, misfits and adventure-seekers from around the Sunni Muslim world. Obviously, I abhor ISIS and don’t want to see it spread or take over Iraq. I simply raise this question rhetorically because no one else is: Why is it in our interest to destroy the last Sunni bulwark to a total Iranian takeover of Iraq? Because the Shiite militias now leading the fight against ISIS will rule better? Really?"
Yes, really? Indeed, why is it in the US interest to destroy ISIS, when they could be used to roll back Iran? What a waste! Should not the US be arming ISIS (directly)? What are “some stirred-up Muslims” compared the the threat posed by Iran?
And lest one thinks ISIS controlling Iraq or Syria instead of the Shia would be a bad thing, Friedmann assures the reader that it's a toss up - given only bad choices, one is as bad as the other!