US/GB provably behind ISIS

Is there any point in posting here, when the Snake never actually participates in the threads he starts?

He does sometimes, although you're right to suggest that he doesn't, given that so many of his threads are hit and run.

Being behind ISIS would be something to be ashamed of, not for moral reasons, but because they are such a bunch of military stumblebums. They have accomplished nothing militarily, other than to slaughter thousands of innocents, mostly for sectarian reasons. One might almost say that Iraq is better off because it got rid of al-Maliki, and now the Iraqis have to put up an actual, effective government. It's a shame that it has come at such a horrible cost.

One assumes that Gunga Dim meant "probably." There is nothing in the opinion piece he quoted which suggests that American or British intelligence or military agencies are or ever were "behind" ISIS. The only plausible accusation from the article is one of criminal indifference to the consequences of training and organizing the opposition to Assad.

It wouldn't be the first time that "my enemy's enemy is my friend" has bitten the West in in the ass.

The classic case of that for the US was the establishment and training of Al Qaeda in Afghanistan to fight the Russians.

Yes, and I was also thinking of Vietnam, Malaya and Korea (where the Red Chinese army fought on the Northern side) . There must be plenty of examples in history.

Another example would be the Greek Communist resistance, supplied and trained by Britain and the US during German occupation, who then had to support the post-war Government side in the 1946-49 Greek civil war.

Yes, British troops had to go in on the ground. More or less the same thing happened in Yugoslavia, except there was not going to be any going in on the ground in that example.