It was the Christians who retook it,as it was a christian visgothic kingdom before the Moors took it. You mean they aim to recapture it after taking and losting it before.

Technically it is not as IS is 'Islamic State' , the second IS is 'in Syria', to give 'Islamic State in Syria'. Similarly ISIL is Islamic State in Libya.

I'm being pedantic, and if the IS forces are coming from Syria anyway then it's arguably ISIS anyway.

Either way, it's safest just to use IS.

The whole situation is a tragedy of humanity. Increasing anti-Islamic sentiment throughout Europe in particular.

And we have the demoralizing possibility that it would have been better if the oppressive regimes in Iraq, Lybia and Egypt had not been ended.

My friend you need to look and read again my post here what is the difference between the basic foundation of islamic teaching and Shia imamiyah (some shia is still on the right path but the one who rulled Iran and powerful are far from islamic teaching). When you mention the war to claim the first caliphate and who is the one who succeding the prophet already been settled a long time ago, even at that time the follower or the people that support Ali RA peace be upon him, didn't  have any difference from the way Sunni pray, it was only the " politic  problem ". It's fine and all.

  What is the problem now actually started after the dead of Ali RA  The leader who succeding Ali were started to not accepting all the Prophet Muhammad companion.  Islam teach all the follower to follow all the companion especially 4 person, (Ali, Utman, Abu bakar, and Umar) including all 8 Muhammad wife, including Aisya, fatima and the rest (i forget the rest ). In Shia Imamiyah teaching especially on their hadith made by their Imam they condemn all the prophet companion and wife, except Ali RA and fatima.

Ali it self never claim that he is the one that need to be the khalifa nor to hate all the companion and all Muhammad wife. from there they starting to not accept all the right hadist "shahih hadist and lead to the bid'ah ( inovation in their teaching) that far from Muhammad teaching.

All my refference are from the history it self even you can find on shia hadith how their hadith contradicting  each other. because their hadit was made by their imam, which is not the closest person to Muhammad (even some occasion their imam claim they even better the Muhammad it self LOl) .

and also wahabist is not ISIS, isis is khawarij ( some follower who overdone on how the way they pray to Allah), Wahabist is a movement that already extinct and their gola is to downplay any other teaching againts King Saud ( The saudi kingdom). Like i said the wahabist is just word trowed radomly by people who dont know anything.

Wahabi are supporters of these evil bandits, i despise extremists and wahabis most of all.....

Too bad Wahabist already extinct along time ago, if it's still exist i will kill them with my own hand.

I'm pretty sure ISIS means "Islamic State - Iraq, Syria" and ISIL means "Islamic State - Iraq, Levant". The Levant being an area (from my understanding) stretching across to Greece.

That would be new to me, do you have a source? I got my definition from a Sky News bulletin, but it may have been misleading.

Just checked Wikipedia and it seems you are right, thanks. But ISIS and ISIL are two different groups still aren't they?

levante is israel,libanon, syria, parts of egypt and a small part of turkey, and jordan.  greece and the rest of turkey are arguable, but thats ore well greece and asia minor.

an isis and isil are the same

Obama says "We're training ISIL" )))) Hilarious... Truth goes on top anyways, no way to hide it!
https://youtu.be/p2NkjNvwuaU

most people don't care about the truth so it ultimately doesn't matter

the general opinion is that the us is trying to help the people over there and not fuel these conflicts sopeople go with that opinion

when we look at the people in iraq, lybia, etc and soon syria i personally wonder how anyone can believe that