What POD is needed to prevent or lessen Islamic terrorism

Archibald

Banned
While there were many factors that would have had to be taken into account in preventing this phenomenon from occurring, perhaps the single most decisive historical event that led to the eventual proliferation of what many simply regard as "Islamist extremism" was the overthrow of the Hashemite Sharif of Mecca, Hussein bin Ali, and the conquest of Hejaz and unification of Arabia by the House of Saud. Prior to that, Wahhabism, correctly recognized as the ideological doctrine that is part of virtually every Salafi-Jihadi organization including IS, had no real presence or legitimacy in the two holiest sites of Islam, Mecca and Medina, and thus no real attention in the Muslim World outside of Nejd. With control of the two holiest cities, and perhaps more importantly, with the discovery of massive deposits of oil in succeeding decades in the regions of Nejd and Eastern Arabia, the Saudis were able to appease the Wahhabi clerical class by exporting Wahhabism across the Sunni Muslim World by the 1970s, just as the Arab World and many other newly independent Muslim-majority states were slowly reeling back from nationalism and secularization.

Therefor, there are technically two PODs you'd have to have to prevent the phenomenon of intensive sectarianism and "Islamist extremism" from emerging:

- Prevent Ibn Saud from conquering Hejaz and enforcing Wahhabism under the authority of being the "Custodian of the Two Holiest Mosques"

- Allow the Hashemites (or really any non-Wahhabi ruler) to conquer Nejd, thus securing access to the oil supply there and making sure that there is no way for the Wahhabi to finance their international expansion.

That ackward moment when you realize some events of OTL are perfect ASB shitstorms. Murphy law as its best .
 
Several reasons have been given for the rise of Islamist terrorism. The dissolution of Ottoman Empire, the formation of Saudi Arabia under the pro-Wahhabi Saudi House, the establishment of Israel, the division of the ME between the British and the French, the failure to support the secular leaders in the ME, the partition of India on communal lines, the Western incursions into the internal affairs of Muslim states, the support of Islamic forces against USSR were all given as reasons and they arm me all correct also. But all these actions are in the past and beyond correction.
The most important reason for the spread of fundamentalist Jihadism is the Saudi money that is funding the ideology and the madrassas that nurture it. It is the West that support the rise of Islamist fundamentalism. If it was UK and France before WWII, USA took over after the War. Even though it is clear to everyone that countries like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are the source and inspiration for terrorism everywhere, USA and allies turn a blind eye and embrace those sponsors of terrorism. The most practical solution to control terrorism is to let a Saudi-Iran confrontation to develop and let the Iranians to beat up the Saudis. If the USA stand back as a neutral spectator, Iran can do it and they too will get weaker. The problem is the havoc it will create in the oil market and the world economy.
 
Similar to other replies:
Have U.K., France, and Italy not carve the Ottoman Empire into portions of their overseas empires. Have U.K. give India Independence and Holland promise the same before WE II. We promised Independence to Phillipines before WW II and granted July 4, 1946. Of course the Filipinos declared Independence on July 12, 1898
 
Top