Pauls' assessment does not fit SOP for US policy in the region, nor does it fit what we know of ISIL. You are clinging to the most vague of strawmen because you lack any evidence to support a claim that all the available data is militantly against.Things aren't nearly as neat as you describe them. One thing is certain, as a matter of policy, the US has supported militant Islamic groups in this region for decades, and except to the most un-observant, it has achieved its goal of destabilisation. I'll accept Paul's assessment as it fits the SOP.
Just because Paul chose to be an idiot doesn't mean that you have to become an idiot in order to defend him.