[Carl in Tampa]

Originally Posted by billethkid

I did not know the answer until I pursued it this morning.

The following does explain the difference and THAT is the point of this thread. Not the speculation of who uses which one or why.

‘ISIS’ vs. ‘ISIL’ vs. ‘Islamic State’: The political importance of a much-debated acronym - The Washington Post

Once clarified, the distinction between the two does beg or raise a question, is there a reason for using one or the other or not.

I disagree with the writer of the linked article who is claiming that President Obama's use of ISIL rather than ISIS is to avoid a reference to Syria. The L stands for Levant, an area which includes Syria.

There seems to be some confusion about whether the Islamic butchers from Syria should be called ISIS or ISIL.

Let's understand the ISIS/ISIL references. ISIS stands for the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, and their expansion from Syria into Iraq was step one of a larger plan.

The larger plan is ISIL, which stands for the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. The Levant is a Muslim area that was part of the Ottoman Empire which was broken up by the winners of WWI, particularly England and France. The Levant today consists of the island of Cyprus, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, and part of southern Turkey.

So, you see, the term ISIL recognizes the grander scheme of the terrorist extremist Muslims to take over all of that area and establish a new Caliphate, a Muslim state which will be a base of operations to spread Islam through the entire world by force. ISIL might be considered the more accurate description to define their long term goals.

They must be eradicated.