Yep. It's like choosing between 2 evils.

I have found this relationship map of the middle east to be highly interesting. It drills down to individual groups. [huffpost.com]

It's exactly what the U.S. would want so we could "liberate" them.

isul doesn't know how to govern and has no interest in governiing. it has been terroristic so long it only knows that. it also isn't islamic, no matter what it calls itself or claims to be. it destroys islamic artifacts as easily as other things, and it commits terroristic activities on its holy days. the only thing islamic about it is the extreme and orthodox restrictions it places upon its people, many of whom are virtual slaves (especially the women). it defies islam while it claims to BE islam. it's islamist; it is not islamic. it cannot produce a saudi arabia anywhere. it can't even produce a real islamic state anywhere. it is definitely a threat to those it terrorizes, but it is never going to be the nation it thinks it already is.

g

If Germany had won WWII you probably wouldn’t have the opportunity to persist in your anti-Islamic paranoia. What if’s and maybe’s are dead arguments. Put something meaningful on the table and we can all get stuck in. At the moment you are merely spouting opinionated piffle! Some substance please.

You are not Wrong.

Assad was as democratically elected in Syria as US presidents are in the USA. Syria is the only secular state in the Middle East and needs to be supported as a bulwark against Islam. The only thing the US is interested in getting control of oil resources. Destroying viable countries and creating chaos the way they have done in Iraq and Libya is irrelvant to them.

Assad played the game, he liberated the radicals that were in jail, to radicalize the opposition and create bad alternatives for his government, forcing this way the powers to support him. At the same time he made his speech less radical to show that he would cooperate with whoever supported him.
ISIS was just the bigger and more organized one as they get some of their organization from other groups (like Al qaeda). ISIS would never win that war, they could at its peak take down the regional governments, but would be obliterated as it there was no negotiation with them.

Hard to tell. So many forces at work there. It's a soup sandwich at best.

Who says the FSA and the Kurds wouldn't be in charge?

I think it's right to guess they would have tried, but wrong to assume they would have been capable. Too many other geopolitical variables in there to know.