Where are you on the hawk dove spectrum?

[TNF]

Within the present context, I am a revolutionary defeatist. Every blow inflicted upon US imperialism is in some sense a victory for the international proletariat. Whenever the US puts its tentacles elsewhere on the planet, I root for whomever actively resists it imposing its will upon said region. For example, where I around during the Vietnam War, I wouldn't be so much in favor of unconditional peace as total victory by the Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese armed forces, which (thankfully) ended up happening, in part aided by desertion and the collapse of morale among American draftees, who (rightfully) began to see the war for what it was - an attempt to prop up a neocolonial regime.

[TNF]

Insofar as ISIS acts in a manner that impairs the ability of the US to execute it's will in the Middle East, yes. If the United States suffers enough defeats in the region at the hands of any of the powers involved (chiefly ISIS, of course), that might persuade the US ruling class to withdraw, which would on the whole be better for everyone involved. I'm not convinced that the prospect of the temporary victory of ISIS in the region is anywhere near as bad as the definitive victory of American imperialism and the subsequent remaking of the region in its own image.

Obviously I don't support any of the things that ISIS is doing politically (i.e. imposing fundamentalist Islam, etc.), but the primary conflict is between US imperialism and its opponents in the Middle East, and that's why I'm for the military defeat of the United States. The US losing would open up possibilities for radical change in both the Middle East (where ISIS would no longer be able to pose as the alternative) and the US (where the ruling class would be utterly discredited, opening up the possibility of change ala the tumult of the late 1960s-early 1970s).