Ever since Obama has became president in 2009, Obama has taken a different stance towards maintaining its global hegemony. Bush II’s tactics is to take over countries like Iraq and Afghanistan and rebuilding the countries. Obama’s tactics is to fund or promote 3rd parties to do their work for them. Obama’s Asian Pivot policy is to promote other countries like Vietnam, Philippines and Japan as a bulwark towards China to maintain US’ influence in the Pacific. In the Middle east however, Obama’s policy is different than Bush’s policy to fund terrorist/extermists groups to do their dirty work.
Just like America funded the Mujahideen to fight the Soviets in the 1980’s, Obama’s tactics is to fund radical Islamists to overthrow or destabilize countries in the Middle East like in Libya and Syria but Obama is short sighted in its consequences. Unlike Bush, Obama wants to change unfavorable regimes on the cheap and has no desire to rebuild those countries. As the result, this created a flood of new refugees from these war torn regions coming to many Western countries. Many European were open to this option but increasing number of terrorist attacks in their cities like the recent one in Paris and now trying to stop this ISIS plague from spreading to its countries by stopping immigration to their countries.
America on the other hand has no problems letting ISIS operate because of all the oil revenue they generate from Syria, Libya and Iraq. America was ‘bombing’ ISIS for a whole year but ISIS operated openly in relative calm in Raqqa, Syria.
That is until Russia intervened (against US wishes) and bombed these very oil trucks.
Now these very same Western Politicans start waking to the notion of trying to stop terrorist attacks from coming to its shores and realized the blowback they have created. Many people in European and the US now start to rethink their strategy of fighting ISIS rather than trying to fund these very same terrorists to try to get rid of Assad.