Why is this our business? Why don't we let them engage in these internecine disputes among themselves, as T.E. Lawrence suggested almost 100 years ago, without our interference? Is it because we fought a needless war against Iraq so we feel invested there? There are similar disputes going on right now in Yemen and Libya yet I don't hear our politicians clamoring to get involved. Why can't we just sit back, get out of the World's Policeman business, let them fight it out, and resolve to have good relations with whoever comes out on top without wasting the precious lives of additional American kids?
4
I would agree with you , except in this particular case, with ISIS. This has been turning into more and more of a global problem/conflict and needs to be addressed. But it should NOT be only the U.S ,dealing with this (even if its past foreign policy has contributed to the problem). The U.N is meant for things like this. But when in the heck is the U.N going to get involved??
4
One reason is that destabilization and barbarism are worse for everyone, including us. This is the case both economically and security-wise. Another reason is that it's inhumane to let people suffer mercilessly when it can be stopped. They're not 'fighting it out' so much as one side is a blood-thirsty militia and most of the otber side is comprised of unarmed civilians being beheaded, raped, burned and buried alive. One doesn't have to be a 'policeman' to feel morally motivated to intervene in such circumstances.
2
The current Administration has no coherent foreign policy. The average American (and I would not hesitate to include the NY Times as well) doesn't seem to care one whit and endlessly provides this very weak president with little to no commentary on the reprocussions of his lack of global leadership. For some indescribable reason the attitude in this country has turned hard isolationist. I presume this attitude is fallout from the recession and ongoing anemic US economy. The problem is that our enemies will leverage our disorganized and ineffectual response to the ongoing rise of Islamist extremism to their gain. Right? This attitude will continue until terrorist acts sprout up in the US. Then the response will be "why didn't this administration connect the dots.." The cycle begins again. Did anyone notice that the lead executioner in this latest nauseating video is an American? Think that this Administration has approved the seizure of this individual's US passport? Probably not is my guess.
3
I read today of the latest act of unspeakable barbarism by ISIS. If I believed in organized religion, which I do not but do believe in God, I would call ISIS collectively the anti-Christ. One by one, as the others watched their fate getting closer and closer, kidnapped Egyptian Christians were beheaded.
Obviously, ISIS has to be stopped. But this time, I am absolutely unwilling to accept cuts in Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, Veterans benefits, the Post Office, and upgrading our infrastructure. The American People are getting sick and tired of fighting someone else's war as public services get cut, and cut and cut do we can pay for wars we fight basically alone dealing with someone else's fights; and because corporations and the super-rich class refuse to make their proper investment in this country through taxes.
I don't see any Jordanian, Egyptian, European, Saudi Arabian, Turkish or (very man) Iranians fighting a ground war against this plague. And, unless these countries are willing to put up the MAJORITY of fighters in the field, and shoulder the MAJORITY of the war expense, I do not think we should get involved. We've been drained by the rest of the world and our own oligarchs more than enough.
If the plutocrats and crooked politicians in this country don't think they are going to have a VERY ANGRY population on their hands if they cut any more services, they are dreaming and probably due for a rude awakening.
Obviously, ISIS has to be stopped. But this time, I am absolutely unwilling to accept cuts in Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, Veterans benefits, the Post Office, and upgrading our infrastructure. The American People are getting sick and tired of fighting someone else's war as public services get cut, and cut and cut do we can pay for wars we fight basically alone dealing with someone else's fights; and because corporations and the super-rich class refuse to make their proper investment in this country through taxes.
I don't see any Jordanian, Egyptian, European, Saudi Arabian, Turkish or (very man) Iranians fighting a ground war against this plague. And, unless these countries are willing to put up the MAJORITY of fighters in the field, and shoulder the MAJORITY of the war expense, I do not think we should get involved. We've been drained by the rest of the world and our own oligarchs more than enough.
If the plutocrats and crooked politicians in this country don't think they are going to have a VERY ANGRY population on their hands if they cut any more services, they are dreaming and probably due for a rude awakening.
9
When Isis captured fallujjah a yeat ago We could have stopped them with a 30,000 man force, as their strength has grown to 180,000 according to published Jordanian and Egyptian intelligence reports, we will need 90,000 troops to defeat them today. 6 months from now it is only going to be worse.
2
The so called Islamic State that this group is pretending to create has no basis in Islam. Majority of Muslims agree and see that this group does not believe in the fundamentals of Islam and their behavior should at no way be represented as Islam! Why are the countries not closing the borders? How did the did they "smuggle" their weapons? How all of a sudden they have this power? We first wanted to "help" the Syrian rebels. Big mistake! if the people of Syria do not want Assad then they shall fight that battle, not outsiders. Those that are supporting this group by giving them weapons should also be held responsible. And to say its a Sunni vs Shia war, sorry it is not. ISIS or whoever they may be kill Sunni, Shia, Christian or whatever they feel is necessary for power, for control and not in the name of Islam. How does a small group gain sooo much power soo quickly? And what is there true purpose? That is what we should be asking, because it is NOT to create an Islamic State as they claim. This is a battle on terror not Muslims!! I am a Muslim American and have been blessed to be in a diverse accepting community. Islam promotes unity regardless of race or religion. Muslims purpose in life is not to kill those who don't follow Islam. For those who will be judgmental on all that I have said or hate Muslims, please read the Quran with an open mind and do not take it out of context! Otherwise stop judging Muslims and Islam for the action of a group of people.
4
How long will the congress mess us about? There is no need in the interference in one war more. We are tired of warring! The progress could be several times higher in case we didn't take part in the military actions. Why can't we stay aside, only sending humanitarian supplies?
4
Right, let's repeat our same mistake from WWII and let this problem get bigger before we do anything about it...
5
The problem is not going away and rational, civilized methods will not work. How do you neutralize Saudi Arabia and its buying of the West with its petrodollars, the same petrodollars it uses to finance terrorists? How do you react to arrested adolescent men with guns who include in their definition of "infidels" Christian, Jews or anyone who doesn't submit to Islam? How do you rid the West of its penchant for greed and power and tacit tolerance of oil-based riches?
The West has a real existential problem and civilized methods will not work. ironically, this is a solution for a Solomon, or, a very drastic, savage military action of an unparalleled scale that is too horrible to contemplate. But remember, there is the inevitable use of atomic weapons - even dirty bombs in lieu of sophisticated ones - by these psychopaths, that humane deterrents will not impress.
The West has a real existential problem and civilized methods will not work. ironically, this is a solution for a Solomon, or, a very drastic, savage military action of an unparalleled scale that is too horrible to contemplate. But remember, there is the inevitable use of atomic weapons - even dirty bombs in lieu of sophisticated ones - by these psychopaths, that humane deterrents will not impress.
1
You seem to be arguing for nuclear destruction on "an unparalleled scale" in response to an article about 31,000 possible ISIS fighters in the Middle East. The hyperbole in articles and speeches of those who would not mind our being embroiled overseas "unendingly" is frightening, yes. But the irrational and "uncivilized" acts being suggested, which go far beyond what even world wars against armies in the millions entailed, are more frightening yet. We will have to live in a world with some danger in it without shrieking and reaching for nuclear holocaust at some point. And the sooner the better.
5
jb, I am not calling for nuclear holocaust, but I am just pointing out that there are enemies that are not rational and are fueled by religious fervor that believe whatever they do, they will be rewarded in an afterlife. It only takes a few fanatics among the 31,000 to destroy civilization as we know it with a dirty bomb.
We have incredible non-nuclear power to use force, or, to use diplomacy. In the meantime, a time-bomb is clicking away.
I'm only asking questions that it seems only a Solomon can answer.
We have incredible non-nuclear power to use force, or, to use diplomacy. In the meantime, a time-bomb is clicking away.
I'm only asking questions that it seems only a Solomon can answer.
Great!
Obama was going to wipe out ISIS terrorists by bombing Iraq and supporting the Syrian rebels.
Who told him to withdraw the U.S. military from Iraq to begin with?
Military analyst Andrew Bacevich said, “What I see is an administration that is content to manage the quagmire that we’ve managed to get ourselves into.”
As Hardy repeatedly told Laurel in the film comedies, "A fine mess you've got us into," always blaming everyone else except himself for the trouble he could have avoided to begin with.
Staying the course president Bush and Dick Cheney originally set or a variation therof would have avoided all the mess we're in now all over the world.
Now it’s Obama’s mess.
6
An article like this does make you wonder how different the world would look (for us in the US at least) if instead of arming OBL and the rest of the now seen as bad guys and if not had given the Russians a hand we had at least not helped defeat them in AStan.
What the world would look,like if we had not gone off on a silly invasion for WMDs in Iraq that were not there.
Id suggest we would all be better off. We would be trillions richer and have a lot less KIA and WIAs.
What the world would look,like if we had not gone off on a silly invasion for WMDs in Iraq that were not there.
Id suggest we would all be better off. We would be trillions richer and have a lot less KIA and WIAs.
7
Give the Russians a hand killing Afghans? It all would have started two decades earlier than it did. Muslims went to Afghanistan to fight on behalf of Islam before we ever gave them a dollar and they would have kept going.
If we don't guarantee the supply of oil out of the Persian Gulf to the rest of the world, we'd have chaos and be anything but trillions richer.
If we don't guarantee the supply of oil out of the Persian Gulf to the rest of the world, we'd have chaos and be anything but trillions richer.
2
Question authority. Follow the money. A new president is going to be elected and have his/her "war". Action by the public is needed to change this, and the public has the power to do it. Campaign financing is used in many ways to manipulate you, to keep you uninformed, "misinformed", to prevent you from understanding this, from believing you can do it, and, if possible, find ways to prevent you from doing it.
6
ISIS is a threat to human dignity and values and must be eradicated by whatever means are necessary. Those who want to take the "it's far away and not our problem to police every jihadist in the Middle East" have to realize that, whether you like it or not, after 9/11 it became our problem. It may be expensive and inconvenient, but that's the reality. These people have made it clear they will make every attempt to attack the U.S. and our allies whenever they get the chance. They plan to plant local terror cells in the U.S., capture and brutally execute our citizens, bomb our embassies, and commit any act war against the U.S. and its interests. That is not to mention that standing around while they commit horrible atrocities and genocide when we have the power to do something about it is unconscionable.
This is not to say military might is the only card we have to play. What about the war of propaganda and public opinion they are winning? Every social media post by these people should be removed. Hack their computers, disable their communication and recruitment networks. Inundate their media presence with anti-ISIS propaganda. The war on terror will only end when we change the dialog and put an end to the concept of jihad as it's being practiced today.
This is not to say military might is the only card we have to play. What about the war of propaganda and public opinion they are winning? Every social media post by these people should be removed. Hack their computers, disable their communication and recruitment networks. Inundate their media presence with anti-ISIS propaganda. The war on terror will only end when we change the dialog and put an end to the concept of jihad as it's being practiced today.
3
I'm wondering what happens when a true political genius emerges to bring discipline and focus to these disparate terrorist groups. This leader would clamp down on the overtly brutal behavior of these groups (and its inherent negative PR blow-back) in order to quiet the fears of both the Western and the Arab worlds. He would further ingratiating himself by attempting to make peace between the Shia and the Sunnis - all while covertly harnessing the power of the rage that drives terrorism - in order to create an unstoppable global threat. The west would explain away his double-speak as a necessary tactic to quiet the Arab "street." People laughed off Hitler in his early years. Never again? I wonder. If we're smart we will be proactive in preventing this all-too-feasible scenario before it's too late.
3
Being smart is not provoking a desperation and a rage in others that drives terrorism.
2
I don't disagree, but it doesn't take an Einstein to see that that ship sailed quite awhile back.
1
We're going to have to wake up to the fact that this problem is a cancer that cannot be wished away. It is going to require hard, direct action, to deal with all hate filled religious extremism quickly and severely, similarly to the approach used in India, where there is zero tolerance for this kind of nonsense. That means in all of the West. There is no other way. Isn't it yet obvious?
5
A gift to the military industrial complex.
6
Which includes Silicon Valley's defense electronics firms, esp. Lockheed/Boeing, and the valley's large Obama donor base, Dave.
4
Next war of choice is warming up in the batter's box. Next chooser's already at the plate.
5
What hath Bush wrought?
9
A.: He wrought something for Obama to confront, as Clinton previously did for Bush. And most likely Hillary will have to untangle what Obama hath wrought, or is wroughting presently. "And so it goes."
2
Clinton did not leave this for W. I am sure you remember that Clinton told W that terrorism was his number one priority and W told him that getting rid of Saddam Hussein was going to be his. Nothing new here. This is all on W and Chaney not Obama. Thanks to Obama, ISIS has stalled out but it will take boots in the sand to end it. Having them be American boots will only prolong it and sprout more limbs.
1
I agree with the Bush/Cheney comment. But ..ISIS has "stalled out"? What?? Check the news lately?
For over twelve years we have kidded ourselves with the Bush/Cheney delusion that we are selling democracy to the "bad guys" and that if we get in there with our pallets of hundred dollar bills and fast buck contractors we can safely post the "mission accomplished" banner for all to see. Almost fifteen years from the start of our "unnecessary" war we now find ourselves faced with those we chose to call "bad guys" stronger than ever and receiving recruits from around the globe. Our generals tell us that these tribal "bad guys" are now an international force despite our waste of trillions of resources and thousands of lives to get rid of them. We need the Bush banner painters to do one that says: "Wrong mission accomplished" and hang it on his ranch barn in Texas.
Let us quit the phoney war on terror and start dealing with reality. Our enemies are human beings and need to be understood and worked with to arrive at a workable living relationship. "Bad guys" is a title that can be given to those who are killing innocents men, women, and children all around the globe. We should do a much better job of avoiding being guilty of having the title possibly bestowed on our efforts. It is time to meet with the Moslem world leaders and try to work our peace instead of wasting our time shouting "bad guys" and thinking we are fighting terrorism.
Let us quit the phoney war on terror and start dealing with reality. Our enemies are human beings and need to be understood and worked with to arrive at a workable living relationship. "Bad guys" is a title that can be given to those who are killing innocents men, women, and children all around the globe. We should do a much better job of avoiding being guilty of having the title possibly bestowed on our efforts. It is time to meet with the Moslem world leaders and try to work our peace instead of wasting our time shouting "bad guys" and thinking we are fighting terrorism.
7
Here's couple of banners for you:
Barack Obama: We are leaving behind a “sovereign, stable and self-reliant Iraq, with a representative government.”
Joe Biden: "I am very optimistic about -- about Iraq. I mean, this could be one of the great achievements of this administration. You're going to see 90,000 American troops come marching home by the end of the summer. You're going to see a stable government in Iraq that is actually moving toward a representative government,"
Barack Obama: We are leaving behind a “sovereign, stable and self-reliant Iraq, with a representative government.”
Joe Biden: "I am very optimistic about -- about Iraq. I mean, this could be one of the great achievements of this administration. You're going to see 90,000 American troops come marching home by the end of the summer. You're going to see a stable government in Iraq that is actually moving toward a representative government,"
6
We all want ISIS obliterated and in this moment let us not forget that it is a creation of US Foreign Policy gone amok.
It all started when Syria was caught possibly building a bomb and ever since US and Israel has been at it. Started of as Arab Spring in Damascus and when Assad tried to to put down the "peaceful democratic" inspired movement, the so called "peaceful movement" could take on Syrian Army might.
Imagine a movement in United States that can take on US military might and cannot put down ...
The wisdom in this part of the world is cynicism .... Americans cannot help themselves creating even a bigger mess ..... next stop Ukraine ....perhaps.
It all started when Syria was caught possibly building a bomb and ever since US and Israel has been at it. Started of as Arab Spring in Damascus and when Assad tried to to put down the "peaceful democratic" inspired movement, the so called "peaceful movement" could take on Syrian Army might.
Imagine a movement in United States that can take on US military might and cannot put down ...
The wisdom in this part of the world is cynicism .... Americans cannot help themselves creating even a bigger mess ..... next stop Ukraine ....perhaps.
6
Sadly, another "I hate to say it but I told you so" moment.
In 2001, the anti-war minority (including me!) warned that what we were about to do was like stomping on a millipede....maybe squishing a portion, but scattering the limbs out into a million dark places to fester and grow. And that's exactly what we did...AND, then we gave these little creatures a nurturing hatred toward us to grow into independent and vicious thugs....again.
"WASHINGTON — The Islamic State is expanding beyond its base in Syria and Iraq to establish militant affiliates in Afghanistan, Algeria, Egypt and Libya, American intelligence officials assert, raising the prospect of a new global war on terror."
We are so stupid.
In 2001, the anti-war minority (including me!) warned that what we were about to do was like stomping on a millipede....maybe squishing a portion, but scattering the limbs out into a million dark places to fester and grow. And that's exactly what we did...AND, then we gave these little creatures a nurturing hatred toward us to grow into independent and vicious thugs....again.
"WASHINGTON — The Islamic State is expanding beyond its base in Syria and Iraq to establish militant affiliates in Afghanistan, Algeria, Egypt and Libya, American intelligence officials assert, raising the prospect of a new global war on terror."
We are so stupid.
7
I am for walking away from the region completely, unless the nonviolent people in the neighborhood--and I assume they are the majority--can pull together and fight these monsters. Tribalism and corruption is the problem here: With a truly unified group of local countries providing boots on the ground, and the U.S and Russians supporting with weapons and logistics, ISIS could be defeated in a few years. We partnered with Stalin to fight Hitler; surely the Shiites, Sunnis, Kurds and other factions can put aside their differences long enough to destroy what is plainly a cancer. If they can't come together (see Iraq), nothing will save them and we should not waste another dollar or life there.
4
We in the West can't beat ISIS and have to leave the Muslims take the lead.
That various groups have allegedly pledged allegiance to ISIS doesn't mean ISIS is "sprouting limbs" beyond Iraq and Syria. For the time being the jihadists are fighting for the same cause, just like the rebels in Libya before Gaddafi's fall. Soon they will be fighting each other and digging their own graves.
That various groups have allegedly pledged allegiance to ISIS doesn't mean ISIS is "sprouting limbs" beyond Iraq and Syria. For the time being the jihadists are fighting for the same cause, just like the rebels in Libya before Gaddafi's fall. Soon they will be fighting each other and digging their own graves.
7
Obama wants to bankrupt Russia by making their 'fight' in Ukraine as costly as possible. Looks like he has learned a thing or two from Al Qaeda and ISIL that are making it VERY COSTLY in terms of our dollars and human lives to go after their gorillas.
The WWII made Britain lose their empire. The 15-year war in Iraq and Afghanistan must make us lose our hubris and recognize that it is not a fight we can continue into perpetuity.
And we all thought Obama was the rational guy. How stupid are we?
The WWII made Britain lose their empire. The 15-year war in Iraq and Afghanistan must make us lose our hubris and recognize that it is not a fight we can continue into perpetuity.
And we all thought Obama was the rational guy. How stupid are we?
4
LOL
The Cold War bankrupted both Russia and the U.S.
If you have any doubts, simply look at our national debt.
The Cold War bankrupted both Russia and the U.S.
If you have any doubts, simply look at our national debt.
2
The so-called "moderate" Muslim states need to do the heavy lifting in addressing this threat, instead of standing by the sidelines fighting to the last American....
3
We should pay exactly zero, nothing, and not lift one finger to save anyone from themselves. The cost of this 'fight' belongs with the Arab world and the EU, maybe Putin as well. So, if we bomb, we bill them for it. But if not, wasting even one cent on someone else's problem is just foolish.
5
After 2001, during the Congressional hearings to go after Bin Laden, the ambassador to Afghanistan, or Iraq, (can't recall which one) made a fist pounding speech, saying if we went after Bin Laden, we would create "thousands of Bin Ladens". Seems his words came true. No end in sight, because there are no answers on how to deal with insane people who would rather die than live.
4
Sorry but this is a fallacy of false cause. It is not at all clear that it was America's retaliation for the crimes of 9/11 that caused "thousands of bin Laden's" to emerge like the dragon's teeth of mythology. No. No. And No again. What's wrong with this form of false-explanation (very common to the Noam Chomsky variety of Leftist) is that it attributes everything in the world to America - America is the sole cause and everybody else in the world only reacts to American government actions. What's so wrong and blind about this version of reality is that it takes the agency away from other non-American people....they have reasons of their own to become little bin Laden's and those reasons have to do with THIER culture not our government and its actions. If you want to know why they do what they do read their books, listen to their preachers, understand their folkways...and you will quickly see that they have more than ample reasons to do what they do and to consider it "holy" and "just". Had America not reacted at all to 9/11 it would have been interpreted as weakness and the same result would have occurred - thousands and thousands of little bin Laden wannabes....and why is this? The reasons are far more complex than simply American actions provoking a reaction...but the core of it lies in their own culture and history - read up on it and you will see the ideal of jihad from the beginning of the Muslim conquests.
2
Bottom line this would have never been an issue if we had a President who didn't draw meaningless red lines in Syria and acted immediately to destroy ISIS when they entered Iraq.
Instead he ignored the problem and described them as a JV team.
Instead he ignored the problem and described them as a JV team.
6
Right. Bush's strategy was so much more effective.
6
There was no ISIS when Bush was president. Barack Obama created ISIS
5
The western hysterical reaction to ISIS lacks common sense. This organization is not strong militarily and its success only stems from the weakness of their opponents within the Suni communities of Syria and Iraq. Their aspirations are not international terror, but a Sharia based Salifisist "state" in the Middle East. Just let them build one, put pressure on it from within and from the outside using proxies, information warfare, economical sanctions. Hurt their moral by using their propaganda tools against, them find ways to humiliate them, turn them to the laughing stock of the world, sooner or later it will fail, and they will become as weak as everyone else in the region.
The reason for this emotional irrational reaction to ISIS I believe, is the fact that they now control the cities of Faluja and Tikrit which American soldiers shed their blood to "liberate". The humiliation of this to the American establishment runs deep.
One has to take a more Machiavellian approach to all this. Let all those western haters fight one another:the Shite axis, the Salafisists, the Wahabists, the Muslim brotherhood, the Taliban, the military dictators. Strengthen the weak if necessary and let them exhaust one another through fighting and demise.
Many people will suffer in the short term, but not more then they are suffering today. This, I believe is a more reasonable path to Middle Eastern stability short of sending a million soldiers to an open ended war.
The reason for this emotional irrational reaction to ISIS I believe, is the fact that they now control the cities of Faluja and Tikrit which American soldiers shed their blood to "liberate". The humiliation of this to the American establishment runs deep.
One has to take a more Machiavellian approach to all this. Let all those western haters fight one another:the Shite axis, the Salafisists, the Wahabists, the Muslim brotherhood, the Taliban, the military dictators. Strengthen the weak if necessary and let them exhaust one another through fighting and demise.
Many people will suffer in the short term, but not more then they are suffering today. This, I believe is a more reasonable path to Middle Eastern stability short of sending a million soldiers to an open ended war.
9
A bold approach, boazl. I like it.
2
I don't get the feeling of hysteria
2
I wouldn't describe the Western response as hysterical. People are witnessing evil in modern day that shocks the mind; anger and fear will sometimes follow. And why wouldn't there be shock and fear? IS is burning human beings alive!
Considering the IS has significant funding/resources to continue growing, other terror groups in the ME are rapidly metastasizing, Iran's nuclear ambitions, the human tragedies, foreign relations, Israel security, US security/economic matters, and other etceteras, a war of the fittest could pose unacceptable risks for which tbere is no favorable outcome.
Considering the IS has significant funding/resources to continue growing, other terror groups in the ME are rapidly metastasizing, Iran's nuclear ambitions, the human tragedies, foreign relations, Israel security, US security/economic matters, and other etceteras, a war of the fittest could pose unacceptable risks for which tbere is no favorable outcome.
1
The US created a monster in 1979 for the destruction of Afghanistan and now this monster has grown up. a suspicious mind would think the US did it on purpose in order to keep is war machine busy. And in the mean time Saudi Arabia is laughing al the way.
6
Exactly.
Only most Americans cannot see it.
Only most Americans cannot see it.
3
"The Islamic State is expanding beyond its base in Syria and Iraq to establish militant affiliates in Afghanistan, Algeria, Egypt and Libya, American intelligence officials assert, raising the prospect of a new global war on terror." A new war on terror? I didn't notice when the last one ended. The press stopped saying "GWOT" when Obama got elected. Now they are going to start saying it again? Is that the difference? Besides the "old" war on terror against Al Qaeda we are now fighting a new war on terror against "ISIS", which is opening up more new franchises. There are now two wars on terror? Is that it? When will the American people finally understand that these terrorists are all financed and armed by the United States and its "allies" (read oil protectorates) Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Gulf oil emirates. The policy that is creating terrorists is coming from Washington. This policy serves the interests, not of the American people, but of the those who currently run Washington, which is not the politicians we elect, but entities such as Big Oil, "too big to fail" banks, and the military-security complex, which is always looking for more wars and more enemies to justify more contracts and bigger budgets and more control. The terrorists are used to destabilize and overthrow countries Washington does not like, such as Libya, Syria, Iran and Russia. The American people must rise up against these forces that have seized control of our nation.
7
The west has continuously replaced dictators who were secular and the "democratic" choice has always been fundamentalists who rule by a strict version of Islamic law which reduces rights of women and minorities. Iraq, Syria, Egypt are all cases which were by and large peaceful. In Turkey as well, the US was the cheer leader to get the Turkish military out, which by the way was very pro-US. Now we have a President who hates the west. It is time we stopped pushing democracy. Let each nation decide what is good for them.
2
Yes. And admit that some countries aren't ready for democracy, but instead are better off with a strongman.
2
War profiteers have set up the Jeb vs Hillary charade.
Jeb & Hillary both represent warmongering over peaceful solutions and they want the American taxpayer to fund it.
It is outrageous that Hillary was advised by war criminal Kissinger while she was Secretary of State.
This is really what is at stake for the future of our USA.
ISIS is the result of foolish self-serving Bush/Clinton foreign policies.
If we want a better future, we need better choices.
Jeb & Hillary both represent warmongering over peaceful solutions and they want the American taxpayer to fund it.
It is outrageous that Hillary was advised by war criminal Kissinger while she was Secretary of State.
This is really what is at stake for the future of our USA.
ISIS is the result of foolish self-serving Bush/Clinton foreign policies.
If we want a better future, we need better choices.
8
I agree Kissinger is probably a war criminal, technically. But he's not an idiot. I would talk to him, among many others, if I were in Hillary's position.
Hillary did not just talk to Kissinger, she said she was 'thrilled' to be advised by him.
Of course Kissinger is not an idiot, just a wily war criminal.
Of course Kissinger is not an idiot, just a wily war criminal.
2
As long as Saudis and other Middle East countries are not willing to put their own boots on the ground, I am unwilling to put any more resources into the area.
With the exception of Israel, why should we be protecting, supporting and keeping in power any government that is so discriminatory that it would rather see school girls burn than permit them to escape a fire "uncovered," not to mention the many depredations, including executions by stoning, visited upon women?
The answer, of course, is oil. As far as I'm concerned, they can drink their oil. Keep our soldiers at home where they can do some good...and live.
With the exception of Israel, why should we be protecting, supporting and keeping in power any government that is so discriminatory that it would rather see school girls burn than permit them to escape a fire "uncovered," not to mention the many depredations, including executions by stoning, visited upon women?
The answer, of course, is oil. As far as I'm concerned, they can drink their oil. Keep our soldiers at home where they can do some good...and live.
4
It seems most people writing here seem to accept the need for some type of US intervention without examining the nature of "Muslim" extremism. This is the latest in a long line of Islamic movements intent on restoring the prestige of Islam in the world. Along the way they want to get power for themselves. This attitude feeds what is a very alienated youth group living in Moslem countries (especially Arab Muslim countries). They want to restore a Sunni caliphate. The entire goal is farcical. The only thing that will happen is that the nuts will fight each other ; they always do.
Groups like this self destruct. we are ill advised to interfere in this process unless we want to provide a common enemy for every nut in the world. Aid groups like the Kurds, protect small religious groups and stand ready to arm governments that wish to protect themselves. The craziness is Arab Islamic based and Islamic thought has to fix it. We can't.
Groups like this self destruct. we are ill advised to interfere in this process unless we want to provide a common enemy for every nut in the world. Aid groups like the Kurds, protect small religious groups and stand ready to arm governments that wish to protect themselves. The craziness is Arab Islamic based and Islamic thought has to fix it. We can't.
1
What needs to happen is for the other Islamic States put all of their blood and treasure up to stop this Islamic State. If they are not against the Islamic State, they are for it and against us.
3
Jordan is one nation that has already done this. Their leader actually flew sorties against ISIS instead of spending all his time on the golf course or taking the perfect selfie
1
Sorties alone won't do it, Larry. These countries need to provide ground troops, and be absolutely committed to the destruction of ISIS. Then, and only then, should we provide air support and weapons. The locals are fools if they don't take the deal. It's like a neighbor saying, We will pay for all the materials you need for a new barn--you just have to provide the labor, and you have to be committee to actually building the barn (Iraq did not build the barn we paid for).
We have an enemy who is willing to behead people, burn people alive and conduct terrorist attacks around the world.
We have a president who refuses to even use the term radical Islam. Who secretly releases top Al-Qaeda leaders from prison so that they can go back and kill more Americans. Can you imagine if we had a president during World War II who released captured German military personnel from prison to return to battle?
President Obama swore to protect and defend the United States. Instead he is being politically correct and fulfilling campaign promises to win elections. The end result will be terrorist attacks in the United States similar to the ones in Europe. Perhaps then all Americans will demand action from this President.
We have a president who refuses to even use the term radical Islam. Who secretly releases top Al-Qaeda leaders from prison so that they can go back and kill more Americans. Can you imagine if we had a president during World War II who released captured German military personnel from prison to return to battle?
President Obama swore to protect and defend the United States. Instead he is being politically correct and fulfilling campaign promises to win elections. The end result will be terrorist attacks in the United States similar to the ones in Europe. Perhaps then all Americans will demand action from this President.
3
Albert Einstein once defined a kind of stupidity as continuing to do the same thing in the face of repeated failure. I for one, would like to hear some new ideas. We might even go so far as to pick a few of that look promising and try them. Loosing is not an acceptable option.
Also, we came out ahead in the original Cold War because we forced the USSR to over-spend on defense and their country started falling apart. If organizations like ISIS can get us to do the same thing, they will come out on top.
We will only survive as a country by being smart, healthy and determined. If we can do this, we will be able to effectively solve the other problems. And as any winning sports team will attest, it will take time, money and willingness to work together to become effective.
Also, we came out ahead in the original Cold War because we forced the USSR to over-spend on defense and their country started falling apart. If organizations like ISIS can get us to do the same thing, they will come out on top.
We will only survive as a country by being smart, healthy and determined. If we can do this, we will be able to effectively solve the other problems. And as any winning sports team will attest, it will take time, money and willingness to work together to become effective.
3
I have a new idea for you. The U.S. should stop sponsoring terrorism as an instrument of policy to overthrow non-compliant governments such as Iraq, Libya, Syria and Russia, and tell its so-called allies such as Saudi Arabia to do the same. Then we should join with the Russians to organize a real Middle East peace conference. Oh, I forgot, they are our enemies too. I guess we are also going to have to stop organizing Nazi coups on Russia's border.
4
Their message, like it or not, is being heard. We have to figure out exactly what the message is and why people are responding. That is really the head of the snake not the military atrocities.
We and other western nations have caused serious damage to the middle East for years. Yes, we need to acknowledge the stealing of oil, the instasalling of dictators the attempt at destroying many parts of their religion. Also, at the same time poverty and despair all over the area. Our one sided Israeli policies and allowing them a nuc weapon has not helped.
Yes, the problem is much more complicated and we will not solve this with a bigger, badder Army.
We and other western nations have caused serious damage to the middle East for years. Yes, we need to acknowledge the stealing of oil, the instasalling of dictators the attempt at destroying many parts of their religion. Also, at the same time poverty and despair all over the area. Our one sided Israeli policies and allowing them a nuc weapon has not helped.
Yes, the problem is much more complicated and we will not solve this with a bigger, badder Army.
2
These groups will eventually play themselves out. Unfortunately it appears that in the meantime the more resistance we offer, including and the more press coverage we dedicate, the more we energize and fortify them. How else to explain their sort of resurgence after a decade of relatively little activity? Therefore, how about applying a different approach, a sort of jiu jitsu to use their own strength to undermine and weaken them, including a concerted effort to debunk their entire philosophy with an view that has genuine value to the Muslim community in the middle east? Surely the overwhelming numbers of people living in that region do not want to see war in the name of their religion. They need to speak out and oppose these rightwing fanatics.
6
How about this, instead of worrying what ISIS is going to do, let's have the United States Government spend a 1/3 of the military budget on developing alternative fuels to reduce our dependence on oil.
What a novel idea.
What a novel idea.
10
Solyndra to the rescue! Obama has shoveled countless piles of money at alternative energy; it has produced nothing but bankrupt companies and an Oregon governor who was forced to resign while the FBI is investigating him
2
Countless piles of money, you say, Larry? To alternative energy? It's a virus riding in a flea on the back of the gorilla of the subsidization of the oil industry.
5
too bad the 'progressives' didn't support the real war on terror when it mattered.
fight them there or fight them here.
the current president is more concerned about combating the police.
fight them there or fight them here.
the current president is more concerned about combating the police.
4
'fight them there or fight them here.'
That's how they justified VietNam too.
That's how they justified VietNam too.
6
Yes but in the case of Vietnam it was not true; in this case it appears to be true as ISIS sends trained fighters into other countries, especially in Europe, to take the war to the West - look at what happened in Copenhagen yesterday. Even if they don't actually send the fighters to the West (or Libya or Egypt) they inspire soft-minded people to do their bidding. Crush ISIS and you will crush the source of that inspiration. I fail to see what we have all this military power for if we cannot use it to smash such a miserable group of troublemaking losers. The problem isn't that America has used its immense power - it's that we have not used it wisely or properly. The problem was not the wars but how they were conducted - not enough boots on the ground, no plan for the inevitable anarchy of occupation, retiring the Iraqi army, and letting a worm like Maliki call the shots about leaving a remnant US military force in the country to safeguard our investment and prevent just such an event as this. The problem is not that America is an imperial power - it is that we do not act like one, or do so only by half measures. These countries should not have been granted sovereignty but a form of probationary sovereignty for a long period to insure stabilization. But we do not have the stomach for that. It's the same basic self-contradiction that wants domestic services, good infrastructure, safe food, secure borders, etc., but doesn't want to pay for it.
i'm 68 years old.
you're simply wrong.
you're simply wrong.
2
The question is not whether or not we will have a new global war on terror but whether or not we can afford not to have one. Our economy, political or otherwise, is dependent on an aggressive, militarized stance. I frankly see little profit in a change in strategy or tactics at this time Sure, in the distant future as the climate warms or those unsympathetic to our nation's needs become more powerful, we may have to make some compromises, but for now we have no choice but to play the cards we've been dealt or risk our empire. I wish things were different but we need to be realistic.
It is not becoming, it is. The conflict of armies is a thing of the past. Multiple groups of varied size in too many locations are much worse than a moving target. Cut off an arm here, it grows another there. The cancelation of the parade in Germany is an example of their effectiveness and power over major military powers, and this was accomplished with only a threat. A threat of growing complexity and power. Crushing it successfully seems impossible....there is no Hiroshima.
1
I have no faith in the UN or its stated missions. It is a gang of countries with personal agendas that come first. It is about money.
But some of the comments here are very naive - 'if we just leave the continent all will be okay' 'we should only provide aid to the victims stuck in these countries' 'leave and let the middle east sort itself out' ....
The most naive comment is that we 'need a diplomatic solution; we need to negotiate.' There is no diplomacy, there is no negotiation, and this hatred isn't happening because of the US, EU, christians, jews, buddists, etc. There is a dilusional group of people following a deranged and power hungry ex-soldier under the orders of Allah (not really, but he tells them so) and they want only death, money, power. In that order. What they will do with that, well, continue to terrorize and take land and gain strength.
While no one likes it, the only way to stop this is to go black and white - ground troops, take prisonors, kill dissidents, morn the lose of innocent lives (there will be some lost), and then set up an accord that the UN overseas (put the perpetrators on trial, fast tracked, and then in prison). It's really too bad we don't have a 'United' Nations. Things worked much better with the UN when Russia and China were not a part of it.
But some of the comments here are very naive - 'if we just leave the continent all will be okay' 'we should only provide aid to the victims stuck in these countries' 'leave and let the middle east sort itself out' ....
The most naive comment is that we 'need a diplomatic solution; we need to negotiate.' There is no diplomacy, there is no negotiation, and this hatred isn't happening because of the US, EU, christians, jews, buddists, etc. There is a dilusional group of people following a deranged and power hungry ex-soldier under the orders of Allah (not really, but he tells them so) and they want only death, money, power. In that order. What they will do with that, well, continue to terrorize and take land and gain strength.
While no one likes it, the only way to stop this is to go black and white - ground troops, take prisonors, kill dissidents, morn the lose of innocent lives (there will be some lost), and then set up an accord that the UN overseas (put the perpetrators on trial, fast tracked, and then in prison). It's really too bad we don't have a 'United' Nations. Things worked much better with the UN when Russia and China were not a part of it.
6
No, your suggestion is not the only way to stop it, in fact, it will only make things much, much worse.
2
A realist. Well done.
1
"Death, money, power; In that order- A graphic history of the United States" coming soon to a bookstore (sic) near you (sic, sic).
2
With recent terror attacks in Europe, it is only a matter of time before European countries fully join the war on terror. One does not have to be directly engaged in direct conflict in an Islamic country to incur the wrath of jihadis. All you have to do is express your freedom of speech.
3
We're all for 'free speech'. When is 'free speech' hate speech?
2
And every foreign problem isn't Vietnam.
This is hardly news... Dear leader Barry Soetoro stupidly pulls troops out of Iraq to appease his party's voting base, funds the JV team, goes behind Congress with one of the JV team's funders - Iran, and now only agrees to send troops back to Iraq for "defensive measures". So what should the sane world expect? Those of that keep up with Barry knew EXACTLY what was going to happen, hence this really isn't newsworthy.
3
Doesn't Saudi Arabia fund Isis?
And the Bush dynasty supports the Saudis:
http://prospect.org/article/bushs-saudi-connections
And the Bush dynasty supports the Saudis:
http://prospect.org/article/bushs-saudi-connections
5
Actually, the Saudis have alsoo funded the Bush Family for decades.
3
They also funded our current President's education.
1
Why do some persist in saying that ISIS is a "new" global war declared on anything or anyone not conforming to Islam? What changes is tactics, not the goal. This is declaring different theaters of war, different wars. It is as absurd as if we had declared the war against Germany, Japan and Italy different wars instead of theaters in WWII. The West is fighting Muslim jihadis seeking global domination. It doesn't matter which group is leading whom, from where, or using what weapons. What matters is, who wins. ISIS is more organized, ruthless and a better equipped iteration of Islamic jihad against the West -- an outgrowth of AlQuada, et al, from the chaos and killing fields of Syria.
That ALL Muslims are part of this global jihad is as absurd as saying all Germans, Japanese or Italians were part of fascism in WWII. In most cases, they were the victims, as Muslims are in today's war. But, that didn't matter then and it doesn't matter now. Either the West fights for survival or it doesn't. Either the West wins or it loses.
If we didn't have a president obsessed with rhetoric and how it makes him look, the US would be busy doing what it must and, having learned a few things about delay from history, sooner rather than later. ISIS is gathering strength because it has a vision, a goal and the willingness to carry it out. Nothing succeeds like success. Pretending it is failing won't cut it. It isn't. It will win or be defeated. To quote Obama: "Period."
That ALL Muslims are part of this global jihad is as absurd as saying all Germans, Japanese or Italians were part of fascism in WWII. In most cases, they were the victims, as Muslims are in today's war. But, that didn't matter then and it doesn't matter now. Either the West fights for survival or it doesn't. Either the West wins or it loses.
If we didn't have a president obsessed with rhetoric and how it makes him look, the US would be busy doing what it must and, having learned a few things about delay from history, sooner rather than later. ISIS is gathering strength because it has a vision, a goal and the willingness to carry it out. Nothing succeeds like success. Pretending it is failing won't cut it. It isn't. It will win or be defeated. To quote Obama: "Period."
1
"Global war on terror" would be accurate if it were rephrased as "global war on Sharia law" -- we're fighting it hot just as we fought communism cold. We mask the issue with the the word "terror" so as not to offend or provoke Muslims who live in democratic societies -- OR our global partners like Saudia Arabia. This is called realpolitik, or doublethink. Geopolitcally, the U.S. and western Europe are fighting to parry the rise of state-command capitalism (China) and to stave off the rise revolutionary Sharia (ISIL). In my current mood, I believe I'm being frank. Curious to see whether others agree or disagree and to what extent.
1
Read the Last Refuge by Gregory Johnson. $ 60,000 Hellfire missiles used to surgically remove AQAP or ISL leaders and Jihadists kill adolescents. Young men or women who have drunk from the well of fanatic Quran verses and want to avenge the death of a relative killed in battle or serve Allah by driving the West out of the Middle East. The answer is not mechanized, digitalized industrial warfare practiced in sweeping scope across impoverished failed states. Trying to kill to the last man standing is so utterly bankrupt a policy that only the military industrial complex and its drone purveyors would offer it. The extremism of ISL is shocking --but we know they are deprived and ignorant, lacking in liberal education, enjoyment of diverse culture and rendered fascist by totalitarian patriarchal leadership. So their weapon is mass death waged through brainwashed martyrs. So our weapon is mass death waged through drones and missiles? What happened to sociology, cultural anthropology, psychology, media persuasion, basic education, material sufficiency? Why should the missile makers make all the money? What happened to waging peace?
2
Our dear leader deserves much of the blame for his failure of a foreign policy, or more precisely, the total lack of a foreign policy.
As these Islamic filth were pouring over the Syrian border in single-file "technicals," a couple of A-10 Warthogs could have inflicted maximum damage, and possibly destroyed this infection much earlier.
But, as it's not a really a surprise, our dear leader did nothing.
As these Islamic filth were pouring over the Syrian border in single-file "technicals," a couple of A-10 Warthogs could have inflicted maximum damage, and possibly destroyed this infection much earlier.
But, as it's not a really a surprise, our dear leader did nothing.
3
Obama cancelled the A-10 over the objections of the Pentagon, the GOP, and most of his own party. The King knows best!!!
1
Since World War II Europe has spent it's tax dollars on expanding the social net counting on the US to spend it's money on world security. Now we have partners in this global war on terror that provide little more than rhetoric. Most countries in Europe are too cash strapped to offer much more. So the choice of our President is how much do we commit to fight this war. Unfortunately politics governs much of the decision. Perhaps if Democrats would have joined with George Bush in his aggressive push against the GWOT instead of ridiculing him for his efforts we would have a better handle on it. But here we are with a President that wants a limited AUMF that is trying to split the loaf between appeasing the left wing that wants no part of this war and being granted full power that the GOP wants to give him to fully engage.
I suspect that President Obama will do his best to prolong serious actions in order to pass this problem to the next President. I fear that he may be more concerned with his legacy and not enough with dealing effectively with this problem.
I suspect that President Obama will do his best to prolong serious actions in order to pass this problem to the next President. I fear that he may be more concerned with his legacy and not enough with dealing effectively with this problem.
4
We fear that President Obama's AUMF is handing the next President a blank check for more war.
War profiteers have set up Jeb vs Hillary.
We need better choices NOW.
War profiteers have set up Jeb vs Hillary.
We need better choices NOW.
3
General Patraeus created the forerunner of ISIL when he paid off 100,000 Sunni fighters not to fight him in Anbar province. It looks like Iraq will soon be divided into Sunni, Shiite, and Kudish regions as it should be. The civil war that we tried to keep a lid on for 10 years after we took out Saddam is now in full bloom and we can't stop it.
9
We give ISIS standing by being there and keeping it in the news. Until a coalition of countries are willing to go in together with a plan to eradicate ISIS, let's get out of there. There are just as many insane terrorists in Africa, yet we aren't there.
1
So, if the US had not toppled Khadaffi, would ISIS be gaining ground in Lybia?
4
Since there are countless references to "Bush's war", I'll point out that the US didn't topple Khadaffi, Obama did. This is Obama's war.
1
I wanted to compliment Christine McMorrow's email and comment a bit further. ISIS is united for one reason only - the Great Satan. If we were to full stop our useless and thoughtless attempt to put our fingers in everyone else's dike, ISIS, like every radical, group in the region, will turn their weapons and ambitions on themselves. One ISIS group's pledge of loyalty to another will last only a long as their interests are aligned and the idea that these alignments are anything more than momentary convenience is naive in the extreme.
I'm reminded of the fundamental reason for going to war in Vietnam; the uniquely American belief, the cornerstone of US policy for decades that Communism too, was monolithic and globally coordinated. Fighting Communists in Viet Nam. it was said, was the same as fighting them in China yet Viet Nam and China were at war with each other 2 years after the US pulled out of South East Asia. Our fear of ISIS becoming some globally coordinated monster is just as false, just as wasteful and just as powerful in driving exactly the outcome we don't want; keeping them focused and united which left to their own devices, they would not in a hundred years be able to accomplish on their own. I've no doubt the leaders of each one of these disconnected, greedy, violent clans get up every morning and gives thanks not just to Allah but the fools in Congress and the State Department too.
I'm reminded of the fundamental reason for going to war in Vietnam; the uniquely American belief, the cornerstone of US policy for decades that Communism too, was monolithic and globally coordinated. Fighting Communists in Viet Nam. it was said, was the same as fighting them in China yet Viet Nam and China were at war with each other 2 years after the US pulled out of South East Asia. Our fear of ISIS becoming some globally coordinated monster is just as false, just as wasteful and just as powerful in driving exactly the outcome we don't want; keeping them focused and united which left to their own devices, they would not in a hundred years be able to accomplish on their own. I've no doubt the leaders of each one of these disconnected, greedy, violent clans get up every morning and gives thanks not just to Allah but the fools in Congress and the State Department too.
5
"...a new global war on terror." ??? So...When did the radical Islamic-extremists in the Middle East, Africa, Philippines, America and Western Europe all get killed, get shipped to Cuba or admit defeat, quit and go home from Geo. Bush's global war on terror passed down, as it were, hot and intact, to Barack Obama, and with which he's still dealing?
Politicians proclaiming "an end of the war" so they can bring some of the troops home and bail on a losing no-win situation before it can become "official" is not the type of victory this country was used to achieving on the field of battle...before Korea and Vietnam.
The "free-world" is governed by a bunch of novices who can't war-dance on the international stage with any degree of grace, skill or coordination...yielding the advantage to the Islamic-extremist radicals who have been at this game of terrorizing innocents practically forever.
Politicians proclaiming "an end of the war" so they can bring some of the troops home and bail on a losing no-win situation before it can become "official" is not the type of victory this country was used to achieving on the field of battle...before Korea and Vietnam.
The "free-world" is governed by a bunch of novices who can't war-dance on the international stage with any degree of grace, skill or coordination...yielding the advantage to the Islamic-extremist radicals who have been at this game of terrorizing innocents practically forever.
Strange how some people only equate 'free-world' with 'war-dance'.
2
Stranger still how some people don't understand that the free world is full of leaders performing a war dance. You may wish it not so or even pretend it to be different but reality is still reality. Clearly the greater point of how politics affects how leaders dance is a reality to be recognized with consequences to be born by we, the people.
1
Iran has the ability to bring stability to the middle east (read: protect oil).
Israel does not. Netanyahu can posture about a nuclear Iran and what that might mean for the future, but Iran can put boots on the ground, and defeat the Sunni threat now.
Israel does not. Netanyahu can posture about a nuclear Iran and what that might mean for the future, but Iran can put boots on the ground, and defeat the Sunni threat now.
3
Here we go again: Global War on Terror.
This harkens back to George W. Bush's smug pronouncements of "Axis of Evil" and "You're either with us or against us"—and yes, a WAR (un-ending, now)—instead of dealing with a criminal act called 9/11 and bringing the perpetrators to justice.
This harkens back to George W. Bush's smug pronouncements of "Axis of Evil" and "You're either with us or against us"—and yes, a WAR (un-ending, now)—instead of dealing with a criminal act called 9/11 and bringing the perpetrators to justice.
12
Bush was correct. Even Obama can probably see that now.
1
“The Islamic State guys are trying to carve out territory”.
Hey, yo, Freddie Wehrey's speak'n Brooklynese, diplomatic speech the world ove'ah. We know som'tin about carv'n out territory and what ought'a be done to the schnooks. Taking a lesson from the various Catholic reformations I'd say that to the victor go the spoils. That is, rule all of Islam.
Hey, yo, Freddie Wehrey's speak'n Brooklynese, diplomatic speech the world ove'ah. We know som'tin about carv'n out territory and what ought'a be done to the schnooks. Taking a lesson from the various Catholic reformations I'd say that to the victor go the spoils. That is, rule all of Islam.
No one can seriously believe that this is the Second Coming of the conqueror, Ghengis Khan? ISIS is bunch of fanatical lunatics with too much testosterone and too little brains.
We know for certain that ISIS is being supported by Big Big Money. Find out who that is and then go on the attack by shutting down any banks and anyone else laundering that money. They buy arms? Find out who the suppliers and manufacturers are and shut them down.
For profit wars that escalate beyond the ken of civility and turn men into vicious attack animals are nothing knew in history. The Big Big Big Money behind it is.
We know for certain that ISIS is being supported by Big Big Money. Find out who that is and then go on the attack by shutting down any banks and anyone else laundering that money. They buy arms? Find out who the suppliers and manufacturers are and shut them down.
For profit wars that escalate beyond the ken of civility and turn men into vicious attack animals are nothing knew in history. The Big Big Big Money behind it is.
3
Many comments read that we or the international community should fight the ISIS thugs. They threaten no one but the countries in the area, and our question should be: Why aren't the countries in that region acting to beat back ISIS? They offer token forces to satisfy the US enough so that aid checks keep coming, but if they aren't that concerned with ISIS, why should we be?
If good-natured Muslims are not alarmed with the humanitarian crisis that ISIS is creating, why aren't they organizing in-force to counter this?
Why are we fearful of ISIS with a nuke? We can turn that area of the world into the largest glass bowl in the solar system, so what threat can ISIS be?
Why isn't Netanyahu using this crisis to bring neighbor nations together to counter this scourge?
Where is the war of ideas here? Clearly, radical Islam is an attractant and in the absence of other more workable options, the youth flock to this heretical bunch. Where is the unanimous outcry by Imams in the region?
We should leave the Middle East--including Israel--for our presence there is creating more problems than it solves. This is NOT a military situation, it is a idealogical situation, one in which our solutions are not welcome or workable.
If good-natured Muslims are not alarmed with the humanitarian crisis that ISIS is creating, why aren't they organizing in-force to counter this?
Why are we fearful of ISIS with a nuke? We can turn that area of the world into the largest glass bowl in the solar system, so what threat can ISIS be?
Why isn't Netanyahu using this crisis to bring neighbor nations together to counter this scourge?
Where is the war of ideas here? Clearly, radical Islam is an attractant and in the absence of other more workable options, the youth flock to this heretical bunch. Where is the unanimous outcry by Imams in the region?
We should leave the Middle East--including Israel--for our presence there is creating more problems than it solves. This is NOT a military situation, it is a idealogical situation, one in which our solutions are not welcome or workable.
2
You really believe it is just a Middle East problem?
Many thought that it was a European problem when Hitler invaded Poland.
We're thankful not everyone in the U.S. made that major mistake.
Many thought that it was a European problem when Hitler invaded Poland.
We're thankful not everyone in the U.S. made that major mistake.
What is interesting is that the Radical Islam Movement believes that they are right because they have God behind them. At the same time, in the US, the Obama Administration is doing everything it can to push God and Jesus out of America. The entire world including NYT readers underestimate ISIS and their power and their power to persuade.
“Submit to Islam and be safe. Or agree to the payment of the Jizya (tax), and you and your people will be under our protection, else you will have only yourself to blame for the consequences, for I bring the men who desire death as ardently as you desire life.”
―Khalid ibn al-Walid
“Submit to Islam and be safe. Or agree to the payment of the Jizya (tax), and you and your people will be under our protection, else you will have only yourself to blame for the consequences, for I bring the men who desire death as ardently as you desire life.”
―Khalid ibn al-Walid
2
President Obama destroyed the government of Libya and Yemen with US bombing and undermined the governments of Syria and Egypt. That didn't stop him from going to Saudi Arabia to kiss the ring of the new leader of Saudi Arabia.
Perhaps it's time to recognize ISIS as just another brutal misogynist government that we can do business with.
Perhaps it's time to recognize ISIS as just another brutal misogynist government that we can do business with.
2
Ah, I thought Obama had the terrorists on the run. Guess not. Guess the J.V. team just got promoted to the big leagues. This is what happens when a peacenik becomes President. He fails to understand the world is a big, bad place and that you have to be prepared to deal with it. That is why liberalism is a danger to our survival. They simply do not live in the real world. They live in their imagined Utopia.
5
ISIS didn't get promoted to the big leagues, Obama was demoted to JV. And he's still in over his head
3
This is what happens when the views of military advisors are trumped by no nothing political advisers. One wonders if Obama has yet learned that lesson? He is after all a hard learner. Abandoning Iraq was a very bad idea.
4
Remember Obama has the advise of Susan Rice - enough said.
2
Now that we have troops near these monsters, and our helicopters are starting to be used in Iraq to fight them, it seems only a matter of time before we see one of our finest burned alive in a cage. It almost seems like we are trying to create another Gulf of Tonkin incident to trigger a full blown invasion.
"...raising the specter of a new global war on terror."
The Times is surely kidding. It's the same global war on terror. It never ended. It's expanding. And the principal enemy is still al Qaeda whatever names it takes on. Absurdly, gullible Americans pretend that ISIS is a new outfit when it is just Al Qaeda in Iraq which changed its name.
The Times is surely kidding. It's the same global war on terror. It never ended. It's expanding. And the principal enemy is still al Qaeda whatever names it takes on. Absurdly, gullible Americans pretend that ISIS is a new outfit when it is just Al Qaeda in Iraq which changed its name.
1
A serious question to the very smart NYT readers: It is appears that we, with support from our occasional allies, have had over 20,000 bombing runs, which seem to have done little to effect a "degradation," must less a "destruction" of ISIS. What are these bombs targeting? Tell me, someone, please, why we can't just hit the supply routes that carry the food, fuel, transportation, and men? If this loving-death group is deprived of everything they need to keep fighting, then they can't keep fighting, right? P.S. I understand about the difficulty of hitting the brick and mortar storage facilities, because they are kept in the middle of civilian populations, but the supply routes . . . ?
I am not so sure the world is a better place without Saddam or Gaddafi. Western governments seem to be willfully blind too the fact that states governed by a central strong authority foralong time can't simply make the transition to working democracies. As much as they may want freedom, they are conditioned to needing and expected and in turn wanting a central authoritarian ruler. The right transitional figure its extremely rare. Most men/women are simply not good enough, not of the right character and don't have the strength to resist authoritarian impulses no matter how it may seem outside the crucible of transition.
2
My oldest grandson is 12. I expect if he joins the military after college and does 20 years when he retires we will still be fighting these folks.
The issue is no longer or should no longer be dems vs reps or why the invasion of Iraq now makes Vietnam look like a good idea or who is at fault or what we could have done different.
We will find ourselves in an undertow. How we got there is a silly moot point.
It's all about getting out alive.
Small team spec ops guys and drone operators are the growth industry of the future.
It's not what should be it's what is.
The issue is no longer or should no longer be dems vs reps or why the invasion of Iraq now makes Vietnam look like a good idea or who is at fault or what we could have done different.
We will find ourselves in an undertow. How we got there is a silly moot point.
It's all about getting out alive.
Small team spec ops guys and drone operators are the growth industry of the future.
It's not what should be it's what is.
2
Funny thing, all of those countries are in the middle east. And yet, somehow the United States is the one mired, no trapped, in a huge old sandstorm of terrorism of epic proportions.
Maybe it is time we send all of the Muslims, everywhere, home to their religious roots.
Maybe it is time we send all of the Muslims, everywhere, home to their religious roots.
1
If we're the ones mired there, "sending them home" makes little sense. We might try coming home ourselves. If they were marching into our country, dropping bombs and flying drones overhead, we'd have a problem with that.
1
There is mo real dofference between ISIS and the al Qaeda and Muslim Brotherhood Islamic fascists already in these countries.
There. Is no new war on terror. The Islamic fascist war against the world never ended.
There. Is no new war on terror. The Islamic fascist war against the world never ended.
3
Not much of a stretch to see ISIS actively expanding its interests in and links to other radical militant Islamic entities and for those groups to seek association and alliance with the Islamic State.
Striking military successes in Syria and Iraq, uncompromising tactics, astute propaganda coupled with intense media visibility, and the unremitting commitment of establishing a caliphate have been powerful enticements for recruiting and affiliations with elements like Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and a proliferations of radical groups in North Africa. To a considerable degree the grand failures of the Arab Spring created a perfect storm for radical movements, and a broad arena ripe for ISIS exploitation.
To say the obvious, the larger and more diverse ISIS becomes the more difficult it will be to counter, both militarily, socially, and politically.
What is so disturbingly telling is the degree to which the emergence, burgeoning effect, and virulence of the Islamic State points to the abject failure of the efforts, over the past decade and a half, of the West in general, and particularly the United States to effectively assess the scope of, and turn the tide of radical Islam.
A fundamentally re-envisioned and far more comprehensive approach is imperative.
Striking military successes in Syria and Iraq, uncompromising tactics, astute propaganda coupled with intense media visibility, and the unremitting commitment of establishing a caliphate have been powerful enticements for recruiting and affiliations with elements like Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and a proliferations of radical groups in North Africa. To a considerable degree the grand failures of the Arab Spring created a perfect storm for radical movements, and a broad arena ripe for ISIS exploitation.
To say the obvious, the larger and more diverse ISIS becomes the more difficult it will be to counter, both militarily, socially, and politically.
What is so disturbingly telling is the degree to which the emergence, burgeoning effect, and virulence of the Islamic State points to the abject failure of the efforts, over the past decade and a half, of the West in general, and particularly the United States to effectively assess the scope of, and turn the tide of radical Islam.
A fundamentally re-envisioned and far more comprehensive approach is imperative.
There are 1.8 billion Muslims in the world. Modern technology is creating massive unemployment and under-employment displacing manual labor with mechanization. Unemployed young men in sexually repressed societies will seek the kinds of outlets ISIS offers. Fighting and, if necessary, dying in a cause they believe in has an undeniable appeal, especially if that cause is a value center of a brand of Islam. In brief, young ISIS fighters believe in their cause - it gives meaning to desperate lives - and an enemy that believes in its cause is the most dangerous of enemies.
Has anyone told our president ?
5
This is what happens when you don't pay attention to a global social infrastructure. The lack of education, jobs, opportunity created these monsters. I have no doubt that along the way, through a combination of external force and internal dissension, this movement will collapse. But we should be mindful, both home and abroad, that the out of control inequalities of wealth we see in the world do have consequences.
10
I agree with you. It is interesting to note that aside from Western Europe, the English speaking world, Japan and South Korea all of the world's economies are to one degree or another extractive supporting economic and political elites who hold their populations in poverty. Until that changes the breeding grounds for terrorism will provide an endless supply of terrorists. What I also find troubling is our drift toward an extractive society with the middle class disappearing, the costs of education rising and excessive wealth in hands of a small few who are unwilling to support society with the taxes needed to maintain a decent society.
"Thus far, pretty much the only country that's been working to combat these madmen is our own."
Not true. The only country with boots on the ground is Iran.
Not true. The only country with boots on the ground is Iran.
3
I think back to 2003 when the "neighborhood advice" given to us by the Saudis and other powers in the Middle East warned the Bush administration about invading Iraq because of the instability it would cause to say nothing of unknown consequences.
By ignoring this advice, we now have all this instability and conflict and threats to deal with, it's truly a "gift that keeps on giving".
We are going to live with all the negative consequences of all the Bush-Cheney presidency for the next fifty years.
By ignoring this advice, we now have all this instability and conflict and threats to deal with, it's truly a "gift that keeps on giving".
We are going to live with all the negative consequences of all the Bush-Cheney presidency for the next fifty years.
2
Two years ago nobody heard of ISIS. Now there is a group that, apparently, makes Al Qaeda seem penny-ante, when it comes to the ability to organize, recruit, and function as more than a merely a violent guerrilla organization. This leads to the inevitable question as to what the many, many billions spent on our Intelligence agencies have actually accomplished since 9/11.
It would appear that we are still largely fighting yesterday's battles and threats, oblivious to what is coming down the road in our direction. One day no one seems to have heard of ISIS and the next it is a significant player and threat. ISIS did not suddenly magically appear, springing from Zeus' head or dropped in by a UFO. Why did our Intelligence agencies, which were supposed to have learned something from 9/11, not have some sense of the dissatisfaction, politics, and organization, which lead to ISIS?
In the case of our Intelligence agencies, President Reagan appears to have been correct, when he warned us about self-serving government bureaucracies, whose prime activity is to expand by appearing busy and defending inter-departmental turf so as to justify ever increasing budgets and power. And, essentially, the intelligence/security corporate complex is merely an update of the military-industrial complex.
No President appears to have been or be willing to hold these agencies accountable, not simply in regard to questionable and rogue activities but, even more significantly, their abject incompetency.
It would appear that we are still largely fighting yesterday's battles and threats, oblivious to what is coming down the road in our direction. One day no one seems to have heard of ISIS and the next it is a significant player and threat. ISIS did not suddenly magically appear, springing from Zeus' head or dropped in by a UFO. Why did our Intelligence agencies, which were supposed to have learned something from 9/11, not have some sense of the dissatisfaction, politics, and organization, which lead to ISIS?
In the case of our Intelligence agencies, President Reagan appears to have been correct, when he warned us about self-serving government bureaucracies, whose prime activity is to expand by appearing busy and defending inter-departmental turf so as to justify ever increasing budgets and power. And, essentially, the intelligence/security corporate complex is merely an update of the military-industrial complex.
No President appears to have been or be willing to hold these agencies accountable, not simply in regard to questionable and rogue activities but, even more significantly, their abject incompetency.
3
People can say they have common sense, yet, if the Democratic party has proven anything, its they DON'T GET IT! I really like the answer Elon Musk gave when interviewed about his ability to find solutions for super challenging problems. And I quote "I simply take complex problems, break them down to their very basic core, and then find a solution for that core problem".
So, let's break down the war on terror to it's most core fundamental using a universal law analogy. If you have a cut which is infected, and you simply put a bandied over it, will the wound ever heal?
Then why on God's green Earth do Liberals think pulling out of a situation that's left half undone would result in ANYTHING less than it re-festering and leaving us to deal with it again?
C'MON AMERICA!!! WAKE UP!!!
So, let's break down the war on terror to it's most core fundamental using a universal law analogy. If you have a cut which is infected, and you simply put a bandied over it, will the wound ever heal?
Then why on God's green Earth do Liberals think pulling out of a situation that's left half undone would result in ANYTHING less than it re-festering and leaving us to deal with it again?
C'MON AMERICA!!! WAKE UP!!!
3
And the US stands idly by. The US needs to take it to ISIS and hit them hard. I remember a TV show long ago called "Rat Patrol," in which brave Americans drove across the sands of North Africa during WWII, mowing down Germans with machines mounted in the rear of the jeep. If the US deployed a few 1000 of those Rat Patrols against ISIS, mowing them down regardless of political correctness and rules of engagement, then we'd take care of ISI once and for all.
1
Let's go to the tape:
Barack Obama: We are leaving behind a “sovereign, stable and self-reliant Iraq, with a representative government.”
Joe Biden: "I am very optimistic about -- about Iraq. I mean, this could be one of the great achievements of this administration. You're going to see 90,000 American troops come marching home by the end of the summer. You're going to see a stable government in Iraq that is actually moving toward a representative government,"
Obama's failures in Iraq are going down in history as the greatest military and foreign policy blunders of the past 2000 years. No human in history has been a consistently wrong as Obama
Barack Obama: We are leaving behind a “sovereign, stable and self-reliant Iraq, with a representative government.”
Joe Biden: "I am very optimistic about -- about Iraq. I mean, this could be one of the great achievements of this administration. You're going to see 90,000 American troops come marching home by the end of the summer. You're going to see a stable government in Iraq that is actually moving toward a representative government,"
Obama's failures in Iraq are going down in history as the greatest military and foreign policy blunders of the past 2000 years. No human in history has been a consistently wrong as Obama
3
Wanna go back to Cheney's prediction that the Iraq war would be over in six months? Or the prediction by Andy Card (W's chief of staff) that the war would cost "$400 million tops"? In the face of growing terror, maybe Obama should follow Rumsfeld and say, "Stuff happens" or just declare "Mission Accomplished!"
2
You probably don't want to get into Obama's predictions, not one has come to pass. Neither his domestic predictions (Recovery Summer!, If you like your plan you can keep it!) nor his foreign policy predictions can produce even one correct prognostication
2
It looks like the "JV team" has upped its game.
4
Well, I hope the CIA and Mossad will devise a suitable false flag operation that will convince the American people we need to continue this Middle East nation building. Where are Cheney, Rumsfield, Perle and Wolfowitz when we need them?
1
This is a theoretical propaganda to involve America in a new war - I do not see in this article any meaningful information to justify the title of the article. Can the authors compare the cost of ISIS brutality with that of Syrian war and justify their points. America decided not to take part in Syrian war, why now America will be involved in a war with ISIS. ISIS is brutal and they are cleverly using social media to amplify their strength. This does not reflect the reality on the ground - the current strategy will work.
The strength of ISIS depends on about 30,000 dedicated and violent fighters. The organic growth of this ideology in other countries is very similar to Communist movement in fifties. To combat the ill effect of this we do not need military only solution - we need intelligent strategy, like creating strong military governments on the Islamic countries.
This is not the time, to spread the message of democracy to Middle East. The society on that part of the world is now crying for security, not freedom of speech and women rights. Let us help the strong military rulers on that part of the world now and bring the security back. Our attempt to democratize the Iraq, Egypt, Syria and Libya has failed. Only enlighten civil society on Middle East can bring democracy and human rights to their people - not patronizing dreams of West.
The strength of ISIS depends on about 30,000 dedicated and violent fighters. The organic growth of this ideology in other countries is very similar to Communist movement in fifties. To combat the ill effect of this we do not need military only solution - we need intelligent strategy, like creating strong military governments on the Islamic countries.
This is not the time, to spread the message of democracy to Middle East. The society on that part of the world is now crying for security, not freedom of speech and women rights. Let us help the strong military rulers on that part of the world now and bring the security back. Our attempt to democratize the Iraq, Egypt, Syria and Libya has failed. Only enlighten civil society on Middle East can bring democracy and human rights to their people - not patronizing dreams of West.
7
If we don't fight them there, we'll be fighting them here.
3
Are they going to buy airline tickets or come over in their navy?
2
Yeah. Same with Ukraine, right?
2
Had we finished the job in Iraq, Mr. President, we wouldn't need this right now. There will always be fascists in the world and they must always be fought. My proof is simple, look at how fascism works. Look at history. This is a well established formula and ISIS is following it to the letter because they know we will respond as timidly as possible and slowly escalate. This gives them time to found branches and consolidate gains. We can see this every day in the news. Mr. president, the time to solve this problem was 6 years ago. You have failed the American people and death is the result.
2
The Islamic State knows what it wants.
The United States does not know what it wants, vice how to deal with the Islamic State and all other Radical Islamic terrorists, as evidenced by the fact that the president and commander-in-chief, Obama the Lame, refuses even to refer to the Islamic State and all other jihadis as . . . jihadis.
Advantage: Islamic State.
The United States does not know what it wants, vice how to deal with the Islamic State and all other Radical Islamic terrorists, as evidenced by the fact that the president and commander-in-chief, Obama the Lame, refuses even to refer to the Islamic State and all other jihadis as . . . jihadis.
Advantage: Islamic State.
2
"... the Islamic State’s signature medieval punishment, beheadings, ..." like our Saudi allies.
2
No more half measures.
Either fight to win, really win, or get out.
The Muslims have the will to victory. We don't, and I doubt we ever will.
Either fight to win, really win, or get out.
The Muslims have the will to victory. We don't, and I doubt we ever will.
4
But our President says these terrorists are ' junior league'
Time OBAMA got rid of his 'insider advisors' and started listening to the intelligence and military leaders who ALL say these fanatics need to be illiminsted i NOW... Not later
OBAMA is so focused on trying to cut a deal with Iran ( he is wasting his time there) and started to focus on protecting the U.S. from these ISIS terrorists who have in only a few months spread their influence all over the Middle East, Europs and you can bet USA
These
Time OBAMA got rid of his 'insider advisors' and started listening to the intelligence and military leaders who ALL say these fanatics need to be illiminsted i NOW... Not later
OBAMA is so focused on trying to cut a deal with Iran ( he is wasting his time there) and started to focus on protecting the U.S. from these ISIS terrorists who have in only a few months spread their influence all over the Middle East, Europs and you can bet USA
These
2
The government of these countries seems to be able to keep it's citizenry under control with it's armies and police. Why does the United states have to be the one sending troops, guns, aircraft?
Let the governments of these countries use the same tactics they use on their citizenry to keep them in control., to stop the spread if ISIS. The United States is financing wars that never end because the governments of these countries are getting richer every year with the money we are sending to help them to fight terrorist. The terrorist come from within their countries,all of these countries should be able to control the spread of ISIS as well as they control the demand for democracy.
If the world stopped all trade with the countries that harbor and grow ISIS, this imaged "war" would end quickly. If the community of world governments can bring Iran to the bargaining table through sanctions, it will work in other countries.
Let the governments of these countries use the same tactics they use on their citizenry to keep them in control., to stop the spread if ISIS. The United States is financing wars that never end because the governments of these countries are getting richer every year with the money we are sending to help them to fight terrorist. The terrorist come from within their countries,all of these countries should be able to control the spread of ISIS as well as they control the demand for democracy.
If the world stopped all trade with the countries that harbor and grow ISIS, this imaged "war" would end quickly. If the community of world governments can bring Iran to the bargaining table through sanctions, it will work in other countries.
1
Doing nothing is not an option for the U.S. We are a target of these extremists and will remain a target whether we bring every last member of the military back to home soil or we expand our military efforts overseas. The real issues are how do we engage, where, and what principals do we adhere to in making those decisions. For me the principals we think about in how and where we engage are the most important. And then I would hope our enemies don't get to read about every decision we reach as they cozy up to their daily NY Times. But I will say this, and I am not suggesting this necessarily should lead to sending tens of thousands of troops into battle. But, I believe we should not be restricted by borders in our pursuit of people who want to harm us. I believe we shouldn't restrict ourselves by fighting "fair". The extremists have proven they don't care about that. We should help countries who are fighting extremism so long as they are in the fight too.
Once again. Thank you W.
2
Thanks Barack, your decision to yank troops out of Iraq prematurely for political gain was the biggest blunder in Western history!
1
The relentlessly growing adherence to ISIS as the most succesful militant group should make us think al little about the underlying motives. Could we ourselves not be to blame for this problem that not existed until some decades ago? Fact is, that the West changed, not the Muslims.
Post Second World War Westerners would be appalled if they knew what their society would become. They would be ashamed of their own offspring: us.
Now we should understand that Muslims, who did not stop teaching morals to their children like we did, and still live by the same standards as they always have, seeing their world being engulfed and destroyed by Western decadence, feel threatened in what for them is more important than life itself. So it is logical that many of them decided to make war on us as the ultimate and only way of reacting and maintaining dignity.
We said goodbye to respect, good behavior and morals and expect that others accept gracefully to get as ill as we are.
Post Second World War Westerners would be appalled if they knew what their society would become. They would be ashamed of their own offspring: us.
Now we should understand that Muslims, who did not stop teaching morals to their children like we did, and still live by the same standards as they always have, seeing their world being engulfed and destroyed by Western decadence, feel threatened in what for them is more important than life itself. So it is logical that many of them decided to make war on us as the ultimate and only way of reacting and maintaining dignity.
We said goodbye to respect, good behavior and morals and expect that others accept gracefully to get as ill as we are.
5
The commenters on this article mostly 'get it.'
The cause of this worldwide jihad is basically us.
All of these words are really great.
But what is missing is the 'what are we going to do about it.'
Until we get up off our butts and get in the streets in very very large numbers, none of this is going to change. As soon as we do, it will stop very swiftly.
What are we waiting on?
The cause of this worldwide jihad is basically us.
All of these words are really great.
But what is missing is the 'what are we going to do about it.'
Until we get up off our butts and get in the streets in very very large numbers, none of this is going to change. As soon as we do, it will stop very swiftly.
What are we waiting on?
1
The "Islamic State" is neither. By referring to it in this way, respectable news organizations such as NYT give it a legitimacy it does not deserve. Shame on the Times, and kudos to organizations such as NPR, which invariably includes a qualifying adjective -- "self-proclaimed", "so-called" etc. We need to remember that they are a band of unspeakably subhuman thugs, not an official state and definitely nothing to do with any religion.
I don't think ISIL "trademarked" the orange jumpsuit. Didn't a big democracy use them first?
1
We should never forget that ISIS is a paid militia. Yes, these young men are doing this for religious reasons, but also because they need a job and a mission, and they don't have that back home. Let's not forget, ISIS only exists because its payroll was underwritten and continues to be supported by the Saudis and other rich Sunnis in the Gulf states.
4
You mean our "allies" the Saudis... The monarchy whose last monarch was kissed and bowed to by our last two Presidents? The same Saudis who supplied most of the 9/11 hijackers?... The country whose laws are the very antithesis of our Bill of Rights?
1
Barry Soetoro was their kickoff fundraiser in Syria.
2
Killers without boundaries require responders without boundaries. Every nation, tribe involved must make its resolve known and agree to necessary steps to stamp out this disease. Lambs to slaughter isn't human way, and when dealing with the nonhuman impulse ofISIL (I refuse to acknowledge them as Isis), the immune system of the social contract collective must fight off this disease. U.N.-do something.
2
Again, although this story is informative and factual it is a no brainer; who couldn't see this strategy a path to its end game? Hope someone submits this piece to the WH staff, ultimately, finding its way to the Oval Office.
4
To paraphrase a saying. We report, the Whitehouse and the Democratic Party, denies.
1
At a time when Netanyahu and some congressional hawks are spending all their energies on preventing a reasonable nuclear deal with Iran that will put an end to 36 years of estrangement between Iran and the West, a most vicious Wahhabi-inspired terrorism is spreading like wild fire throughout the Middle East, Pakistan, North Africa and beyond.
The world needs a concerted action to fight against this menace that is now spreading to Europe as we have seen by the events in France, Belgium and now Denmark. In the long term the answer is to deal with the root-causes of this vicious form of terrorism, which involves better relations between the West and the Middle East and a fair settlement to the Palestinian issue. But in the short term, there is an urgent need for a combined military force from various regional countries with UN and Western support to fight the curse of terrorism that is especially devastating the Middle East, but regional countries should be in charge. Iran can play a decisive role in this regard, but this cannot happen when the West is still fighting old battles and is preoccupied with old hostilities.
The world needs a concerted action to fight against this menace that is now spreading to Europe as we have seen by the events in France, Belgium and now Denmark. In the long term the answer is to deal with the root-causes of this vicious form of terrorism, which involves better relations between the West and the Middle East and a fair settlement to the Palestinian issue. But in the short term, there is an urgent need for a combined military force from various regional countries with UN and Western support to fight the curse of terrorism that is especially devastating the Middle East, but regional countries should be in charge. Iran can play a decisive role in this regard, but this cannot happen when the West is still fighting old battles and is preoccupied with old hostilities.
10
Reasonable nuclear deal? Define that please. And as far as 36 years of estrangement between Iran and the West, are you saying that 100 or more countries are wrong and Iran did not cause the estrangement?
The NYT and you are delusional.
The NYT and you are delusional.
Iran is a terrorist state and can not be trusted.
The west teaming up with mid East nations, beyond the agreement to an air base, is laughable. It's never worked out well for the West when these agreements are arranged, and it won't work now. If Barry Soetoro had opened federal lands to drilling six years ago, we wouldn't need a drop of mid East oil today.
This is today's "we told you so".
This is today's "we told you so".
1
Perhaps the first thing we should do is propose a resolution at the United Nations that would frame the ideology impelling this movement as an open invitation to Crimes Against Humanity - with the hope of making the ideology itself illegal, and its financial and intellectual supporters thus liable for any financial damages in any subsequent attack.
Simply put, we need to drain the Wahhabi swamp of money.
Simply put, we need to drain the Wahhabi swamp of money.
7
The UN is nothing more than a little dictator's club, and Barry wants in, so this isn't a realistic expectation.
1
Still not afraid of Radical Islam?
13
He is unwilling to acknowledge it exists, just like our Dear Leader is afraid to acknowledge it exists.
2
this is like the communist terror that was waged in the 60's and 70's. These people are blinded by an even ideology and will not stop until they are stopped. This is going to take decades to fight. The key is to stop the funding. Communism used to be funded by the former Soviet Republic and China (while the counter effort was funded by the CIA). This ideology has its roots in Saudi Dictatorship.
1
It's roots are actually in the entire region's religion.
1
Now wait a minute. Didn't President Obama JUST tell us "ISIS is on the defensive??" Now, we find out they're within five miles of our Marine Corp base in Anbar?? I'm just glad he's in California working on his "short game."
11
The attack was only a recon mission, ISIS is preparing to launch their own Tet Offensive.
First I would allow, even encourage and facilitate all violent terrorists to leave western countries and join ISIS in Syria and Iraq. Quick and easy way to get rid of violent people, Muslim or not, and then cream them when they get concentrated in one place.
Once a battleground is defined, exterminate them, following their own rules. No concern for civilians or collateral damage. No instrument or technique of annihilation should be withheld Mental and physical torture, including religious transgressions becomes the order of the day.
That should even the things.
Once a battleground is defined, exterminate them, following their own rules. No concern for civilians or collateral damage. No instrument or technique of annihilation should be withheld Mental and physical torture, including religious transgressions becomes the order of the day.
That should even the things.
2
Yeah, that's not on Barry's table... his request for war actions do not include offensive maneuvers.
1
Oh, but our Progressives would cry themselves to sleep worrying about the poor dears.
1
It seems to me that Western military interference in the area has not proven to be very successful. That conclusion provides to answer to the problem of terrorism, but it does give me a clue to the solution. More military may not prove to create a better outcome.
I ask you: Is Afghanistan at peace 40 years after the Russian occupation and 10 years after ours? Is Iraq the picture of democracy? What good have the "great powers" done in this area of the world with their military might?
I ask you: Is Afghanistan at peace 40 years after the Russian occupation and 10 years after ours? Is Iraq the picture of democracy? What good have the "great powers" done in this area of the world with their military might?
8
When (liberal) politicians, who are mostly lawyers, are allowed to prosecute wars this is what happens. It's Vietnam all over again.
2
And this is a surprise?
It is a worldwide Jihad.....and the world is being Jihaded (new one for Webster's).
The Muslim world only complains when one of their own is anti-Jihaded.
They are silent when ISIS is performing their Jihad activities, but want the rest of the world to preserve their Royal Oil Wealth.
It is a worldwide Jihad.....and the world is being Jihaded (new one for Webster's).
The Muslim world only complains when one of their own is anti-Jihaded.
They are silent when ISIS is performing their Jihad activities, but want the rest of the world to preserve their Royal Oil Wealth.
8
And yet here in the USA, instead of becoming oil-independent, we instead let our Green Army fight against our own economic interests.
Are authors ramping up the propaganda machine for a war that is not really needed because ISIL seems to be eating themselves?
3
It ISIS. Giving them the credibility behind the label ISIL only tells them you agree that Israel should not exist, and that should never be the stance of any free world nation. Barry loves to stab at Israel by calling his JV team ISIL. It's one of the most un-American thing Barry says regularly. Most people believe he agrees with ISIS by continuing to call them ISIL.
1
The basic goal here is not only to create an Islamic Caliphate, which is moving forward quite well with brutal adherents, but to instigate ongoing attacks on non Muslims in places like Copenhagen and Times Square using explosives and automatic weapons. Future plans will rely on the Paris Model using small teams to overwhelm on site security, which the attacker in Denmark could not do when faced with return fire. What to do? Bombing their HQ and leaders? A broader coalition of infantry, tanks and artillery engaging the ISIS would probably help. But the murderous aspect of Islam is a multi headed beast. This all began in the year 700 and has never stopped except when the Muslim world has been conquered or rendered irrelevant by their rejection of modernity.
9
I wonder if we had never attacked Iraq and had left Saddam in power to oppose Iran if the world would look much different now. I suspect that the world would be a safer place than exists today. However, we can not rewrite history nor can we ignore ISIS. I find it interesting that both Iran and Saudi Arabia appear to oppose the rise of this militant group. Perhaps their mindless brutality will produce some agreement where none ever existed before. Drones, covert action etc. is the only effective means of opposing these extremists both from a political and practical standpoint.
2
I have more appreciation for the iconography of Kali drinking the blood of demons she destroyed. The legend is that one demon had obtained a boon that every drop of his blood that hit the ground would give birth to another demon so she collected his blood even as she killed him and drank it.
2
Once again history repeats itself. The absolute peril of disengagement, pullbacks and "nuevo isolation" is that something fills the peer vaccum. Usually something worse or in ISIS case something very very bad indeed. How many journalists and aid workers must be beheaded.?How many schoolgirls must be raped and murdered and turned into sex slaves? If America is more than a place, and is in fact an idea based on freedom and justice, how long before we stand up and fight the Totalitarian Ideology of Radical Islam ? It is a threat, just like the Nazi Ideology and the Communist Ideology that we must defeat to survive as a civilization. Sooner is better than later. Think of the lives we would have saved if we had stopped Hitler in the 1930s.
6
"If America is more than a place, and is in fact an idea based on freedom and justice..."
America has become a place where people are more worried about whether Muslim terrorists are traumatized by waterboarding, where people are more interested in who wins the oscar for best movie than in teaching ethics to the next generation, and where people are more worried about redefining the meaning of marriage than in re-strengthening marriage itself as the building block of our society.
America has become a place where people are more worried about whether Muslim terrorists are traumatized by waterboarding, where people are more interested in who wins the oscar for best movie than in teaching ethics to the next generation, and where people are more worried about redefining the meaning of marriage than in re-strengthening marriage itself as the building block of our society.
There will never be a "win" to this war. This is not like wars of the past where there are winners and losers, reparations, treaties, etc. It will continue like Medusa as each head is cut off until it exhausts the populations involved in it. We should remove ourselves from it if possible, giving aid to the terrorized perhaps but stay away from the battles.This war-like the 100 Years religious war of medieval Europe-is a battle between extremist and moderate Islam, between Sunni and Shia Islam, the period of Reformation that Islam needs to bathe itself in before it can enter the modern age of it's own Enlightenment. Our involvement makes us the enemy, the target, and distorts the situation even further. I'd like to see Iran take the lead against ISIS, as they are natural enemies.
8
We win if we survive the global wildfire of Radical Islam that has declared and waged war on us and our allies. If we lose, you will know it because you and you daughters will be wearing burkhas or reduced to slavery. Losing is not acceptable.
Except that it also erupts in our own nation... 9/11, Ft. Hood, Boston, and others.
My goodness...many people continue to blame Bush, Cheney, et al. Fine, but...Let me ask, how many of you have ever looked at intelligence reports? It's called intelligence because it's not hard and fast facts. In the end, they're assessments. Many say Bush and Co. lied Where's your proof? The media? You mean media like Dan Rather and Brian Williams? Again, where's your proof? Provide your proof! Intelligence agencies the world over then lied as so many world leaders believed the same. For the record, so did Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy...did they too lie? Back to Obama...he's been president for 6 years. Does he bear no responsibility? After countless (illegal) drone strikes this is what we have? How many innocents have been killed by Obama-administration ordered drone strikes? Where's your outrage on that? Oh I get it...this president has a "D" following his name. For all the Bush bashers...keep living in the past if it comforts you. Many of us will deal with the here and now. And to whoever posted "Give peace a chance"...wonderful thoughts but that is just not reality!
10
One does not have to prove something is not true. The burden is on the one claiming it to be true to prove that it is. Your distinction between intelligence and fact conveniently overlooks the fact that bad intelligence was used as a pretext to get us into an unnecessary war. There is no excuse for the reckless folly of the Bush administration even if it falls short of outright deceptiveness. So please spare us your distorted view of history.
2
Even if Bush didn't lie, he committed a monumental error in judgement. No, Obama bears no responsibility for the political vacuum Bush created which gave rise to ISIS. Capiche?
1
How can the JV team do so well?
7
Unrestricted warfare needs to be unleashed upon ISIS; no mercy, no quarter.
5
If we don't invade Iraq and destabilize the whole region ISIS never happens,we should have sent special forces and the CIA until we got Osama and fought the rest with drones.Colin Powell said it best"you broke it you bought it" and that sums up out occupation of Iraq
6
America and israel only invite more hatred and revenge by attacking in the Mideast. History has shown this to be true.
And American excessive backing to Israel against the Arab and Muslim World is the cause of 9/11 and other attacks :
Americans to a large extent have been insulated from the terror and misery resulting from the war "responding" to 9/11 (and the lies of Cheney, et al).
After reviewing the events at the Boston Marathon in my mind's eye at bedtime last night I prayed for the victims, their families, bystanders, the responders, police & fire personnel and medical professionals caring for the dead, wounded, and traumatized. After a while I thought about countries like Iraq and Afghanistan where hundreds of thousands are dead or have experienced this, sometimes on a daily basis, and are still experiencing it, but on much larger scale. They have lost their family members, their health and wholeness, homes, livelihoods, and their whole way of life.
Of course we can only keep this in the forefront of our awareness to a limited extent. So as we contemplate the senselessness of this attack and mourn the violence and harm to the individuals, the families, the city and the country, it's time to take a moment and extend our consciousness and sympathies to not just Boston and the people who were part of this tragic event, but contemplate other victims of this type of violence throughout the world.
And American excessive backing to Israel against the Arab and Muslim World is the cause of 9/11 and other attacks :
Americans to a large extent have been insulated from the terror and misery resulting from the war "responding" to 9/11 (and the lies of Cheney, et al).
After reviewing the events at the Boston Marathon in my mind's eye at bedtime last night I prayed for the victims, their families, bystanders, the responders, police & fire personnel and medical professionals caring for the dead, wounded, and traumatized. After a while I thought about countries like Iraq and Afghanistan where hundreds of thousands are dead or have experienced this, sometimes on a daily basis, and are still experiencing it, but on much larger scale. They have lost their family members, their health and wholeness, homes, livelihoods, and their whole way of life.
Of course we can only keep this in the forefront of our awareness to a limited extent. So as we contemplate the senselessness of this attack and mourn the violence and harm to the individuals, the families, the city and the country, it's time to take a moment and extend our consciousness and sympathies to not just Boston and the people who were part of this tragic event, but contemplate other victims of this type of violence throughout the world.
2
If Obama listens to his advisers, generals, Podesta, Romney, McCain and the entire world and doesn't irresponsibly pull troops out of Iraq too soon, ISIS never happens.
2
In another comment I had said that no one had ever shown me how this ISIS organization poses any threat to the USA. I say categorically that they do not.
This organization sprouting limbs in other places is a direct result of the interference and CONTROL by the US (and its allies) into the lives of these people. It is a vicarious control by the installation of dictators (and monarchs) who have suppressed entire populations & enriched themselves beyond imagination. This is something the populous there will no longer tolerate and people like ISIS are hell bent in removing these dictators and install their form of government.
I come from a military background and there is NO way you control a land unless you have your man on the ground. It is very difficult to give up power/control and I understand that the west does not want to. However, now it is going to become extremely expensive as the people there will not take suppression and poverty and lack of conveniences of life anymore whilst their leaders enjoy Champagne, caviar, women (yes women) with the support from western intelligence services.
We are already bankrupt, look at our cities, infrastructure, and continuing on this path will destroy us. Let the Arab dictators and monarchs deal with this and we focus on keeping up our societies. In re any terrorism towards us, if we mind our affairs we can expect them to leave us alone. We hurt them with bombs, we can expect some here.
This organization sprouting limbs in other places is a direct result of the interference and CONTROL by the US (and its allies) into the lives of these people. It is a vicarious control by the installation of dictators (and monarchs) who have suppressed entire populations & enriched themselves beyond imagination. This is something the populous there will no longer tolerate and people like ISIS are hell bent in removing these dictators and install their form of government.
I come from a military background and there is NO way you control a land unless you have your man on the ground. It is very difficult to give up power/control and I understand that the west does not want to. However, now it is going to become extremely expensive as the people there will not take suppression and poverty and lack of conveniences of life anymore whilst their leaders enjoy Champagne, caviar, women (yes women) with the support from western intelligence services.
We are already bankrupt, look at our cities, infrastructure, and continuing on this path will destroy us. Let the Arab dictators and monarchs deal with this and we focus on keeping up our societies. In re any terrorism towards us, if we mind our affairs we can expect them to leave us alone. We hurt them with bombs, we can expect some here.
9
How utopian.... unrealistic, but utopian.
1
This doesn't happen without money. As we put at risk our sons and daughters fighting wars, we looked the other way as the Saudis funded venture capital to this enterprise.
Ask yourself, how these thugs can sell the oil they now have? And who is pumping it for them? Where do the engineers and financiers come from?
Fact is, the world powers don't really think this is a big enough threat to step on the powerful within their own countries that enable them.
LEAVE THEM TO THEMSELVES. It is a social order that can not survive in a modem world. ISOLATE them as you would a community with a plague, which it is.
Ask yourself, how these thugs can sell the oil they now have? And who is pumping it for them? Where do the engineers and financiers come from?
Fact is, the world powers don't really think this is a big enough threat to step on the powerful within their own countries that enable them.
LEAVE THEM TO THEMSELVES. It is a social order that can not survive in a modem world. ISOLATE them as you would a community with a plague, which it is.
7
Isolate them would also include not allowing them to walk across the USA's southern border, where Barry Soetoro has INSISTED that it remain open. After this past week's memo instructing border patrol to not detain jumpers, I think we can see where his loyalties lie.
1
The slogans of ISIS resemble those of the Muslim invaders at the dawn of Islam. The tactics used by ISIS such as beheading of hostages and enslaving women are aimed at terrorizing the populations under their rule into submission. In my view this is the next strategic chapter in the revival of Islamic empire after Iran was overtaken in 1979. Iran's rule by Shiite cleric seemed limited and even beneficial to politicians of Carter era. Yet it has survived to change the geopolitics of the entire Middle East and the world. Iranian revolution's most destructive byproduct has been awakening of the thousand year-old ambitions of a new Islamic empire among the Sunni majority. The time to encounter and defeat the nascent ISIS is now, boots on the grounds and whatever else is required to fight them. ISIS has the potential to bring down governments. If US does not fight a relatively small local war today, which is the direct consequence of Iraq invasion, in the near future it may have to fight much larger wars around the world to defeat the ISIS cancer.
3
But wait liberals, Bush was long gone when Obama's pulsinamity and "pink" iines in Syria created ISIS in Syria. Unless you truly believe that "the One" is the Messiah and can do no wrong, you have to hang this one on Obama.
7
A typical conservative comment that ignores the long lasting effect of Bush and the neocons. The invasion of Iraq will go down in history as as the worst decision ever made by a Vice President and Bush as the weakest, stupidest President who set events in motion without any idea what would happen.
3
Obama's mistakes in Syria and Libya don't change the fact the Bush's useless war had already destabilized the whole region.
2
During USA basic training we told that wars are fought for turf and they would always be a need for an Army, boots on the ground .
2
And so we see the stupidity of the policies followed by both the Bush and the Obama Administrations. While the dictators were sometimes unpredictable and uncontrollable, they imposed a type of peace on the Middle East.
Bush removed Sadam and Obama removed Gaddafi and the Egyptian President. Often I think that these two, especially Obama, wanted radical Islam to take over the region.
Now we are left with a nightmare that threatens both Europe and the US. Hail to Bush and Obama; two of the most stupid men who ever held the high office of President.
Bush removed Sadam and Obama removed Gaddafi and the Egyptian President. Often I think that these two, especially Obama, wanted radical Islam to take over the region.
Now we are left with a nightmare that threatens both Europe and the US. Hail to Bush and Obama; two of the most stupid men who ever held the high office of President.
4
We are a mirror of the actions taken by our self anointed elite, are we not? The Arab Spring & the Occupy Movement in the Midwest became entwined & have faced the same uprooting & bludgeoning.
Whilst everyone searches for answers and many believe in 1 simplistic solution or another ask yourselves the following questions:
1. If you argue that modernity is the solution and that it will never take root in the ME, ask whether fulsome support from many in the US for specific ethnic groups based on books written thousands of years ago really passes the modernity test?
2. Do you feel that, having chosen your friends, you should accept their actions regardless of how egregious they may be, just because they cause harm to those whom you have CHOSEN as your enemies (for whatever reason that may be)?
3. Is seeing every problem through the prism of "what any proposed action mean for country X (insert a US ally here)" really result in a proper analysis of the problem and possible equitable solutions?
4. Is the childish teen-like obsession with your latest "best friend forever" causing you to reach simplistic assessments of a region which, I am sure most would agree, exhibits a high degree of political complexity?
5. Can you name the manufacturers of that super intelligent ordnance which will not claim the lives of Sunni Iraqis who have been drawn to Da'ish by the sectarian policies of the Iraqi government?
There are many more questions I could pose but I'm currently watching a thrilling cricket match and am somewhat distracted. But not too distracted to notice the same, tired, cliched comments from many (Heather, in NY (I believe) being a noticeable exception).
1. If you argue that modernity is the solution and that it will never take root in the ME, ask whether fulsome support from many in the US for specific ethnic groups based on books written thousands of years ago really passes the modernity test?
2. Do you feel that, having chosen your friends, you should accept their actions regardless of how egregious they may be, just because they cause harm to those whom you have CHOSEN as your enemies (for whatever reason that may be)?
3. Is seeing every problem through the prism of "what any proposed action mean for country X (insert a US ally here)" really result in a proper analysis of the problem and possible equitable solutions?
4. Is the childish teen-like obsession with your latest "best friend forever" causing you to reach simplistic assessments of a region which, I am sure most would agree, exhibits a high degree of political complexity?
5. Can you name the manufacturers of that super intelligent ordnance which will not claim the lives of Sunni Iraqis who have been drawn to Da'ish by the sectarian policies of the Iraqi government?
There are many more questions I could pose but I'm currently watching a thrilling cricket match and am somewhat distracted. But not too distracted to notice the same, tired, cliched comments from many (Heather, in NY (I believe) being a noticeable exception).
4
The government of America, only speak about fight against ISIS. Changes upon nothing, ISIS burns people alive further, now will start seizing still territories. Initially ISIS was created by America. As it is possible believes at present that they struggle with them. After all they can be a single whole!!!
This extremism is an expression of the failure of Middle Eastern countries mired in failed economies, failed education systems, suppression of women, authoritarian dictatorships, etc. So of course their young men seek other outlets (and the MIddle East has by far the youngest demographic profile of any region on earth). So how can we ever succeed in military "whack-a-mole" campaigns when an entire region is creating more youngsters without prospects who find extremist religion their outlet? The answer can only be a long, patient effort to change the region itself...not by too much American arrogance/intervention, which produces local "blowback," but by more subtle cultural means focusing on information and educational systems and, when it's possible, a bit more openness in political systems. In the meantime, we'll have to put up for decades with terrorism here and there and kill its exponents. But they will keep coming and if we're ever to "get over" this, we need to show strategic patience to defeat it, because just bombing will simply produce more angry Arab youngsters putting on suicide bomber jackets. In the short term we DO need bombs/drones. But ultimately it is only in the education and development sphere that we and the Islamic world itself can overcome this.
7
Thanks so much, PNAC! Including Cheney, Wolfowitz and the stupid neocons and Jeb Bush, who signed it, but does not want to talk about it now, for destabilizing the whole Middle East. When will you and your fellow neocon morons be publicly shamed for this spreading evil you helped unleash?
13
Obama is the father of ISIS. Obama created ISIS when he pulled troops out of Iraq too soon for cheap temporary political points. The Pentagon, Podesta, McCain, Romney warned him it was a bad idea
1
This is purely the fault of the Neocons, who not only did not go to prison after the Iraq debacle which produced ISIS, but continued to run US foreign policy in the Obama administration.
We need to remember that, when that same crowd of malignant chickenhawks wants to drag us into more war, the final war, with Russia, in Ukraine.
We need to remember that, when that same crowd of malignant chickenhawks wants to drag us into more war, the final war, with Russia, in Ukraine.
13
Actually, AIPAC and Israel are in their stirring the pot, for all they're worth, along with the witches from Virginia.
3
"A new global war on terror." Great. The last one worked wonderfully.
America and Americans have one big lesson yet to learn. Militarism and war will not deal wit this problem. Look at the mess you have already made. What would you - and the world - pay today to have Saddam, Assad and indeed Gadaffi back in power? Think again before you get badly out of your depth.
America and Americans have one big lesson yet to learn. Militarism and war will not deal wit this problem. Look at the mess you have already made. What would you - and the world - pay today to have Saddam, Assad and indeed Gadaffi back in power? Think again before you get badly out of your depth.
13
2000 years ago, many Greek tyrants and kinglets left they're states to the Romans in a similar attempt to buy them secutrity and the philhellenes in Rome were suckered in like flies to honey. A few centuries later and the whole empire was moved to Greece at Byzantium, and Koine Greek became , again, the language of the Med.
This probably held back the development of Western civilization by 500 years or more as it allowed Rome to fall into a long, deep sleep during the dark ages and, when Italy finally awoke-Europe had sprouted! States once barbarian filled swamp;and-German principalities, Britain of pearls and everlasting fog where Caligula feared he would be burned by the blue painted natives in a wicker basket-France, a alf barbarian bastard brother of the Spanish who were the illegitimate offspring of Rome's greatest enemies: Carthage. And even the dutch-a people constantly fighting just not to be drowned by the North Sea were all among the world's great powers because Rome had been slipped a mickey by it's clever Greek slaves.
What Briton would, in 1789 have made the prediction that the Colonies would come to the rescue of the immensely wealthy and world's greatest military power in 125 years? Leaving the Mother Country broke and in debt to the States forever?
Not even the Arabs can keep up the play for this long before the planet tires of them.
This probably held back the development of Western civilization by 500 years or more as it allowed Rome to fall into a long, deep sleep during the dark ages and, when Italy finally awoke-Europe had sprouted! States once barbarian filled swamp;and-German principalities, Britain of pearls and everlasting fog where Caligula feared he would be burned by the blue painted natives in a wicker basket-France, a alf barbarian bastard brother of the Spanish who were the illegitimate offspring of Rome's greatest enemies: Carthage. And even the dutch-a people constantly fighting just not to be drowned by the North Sea were all among the world's great powers because Rome had been slipped a mickey by it's clever Greek slaves.
What Briton would, in 1789 have made the prediction that the Colonies would come to the rescue of the immensely wealthy and world's greatest military power in 125 years? Leaving the Mother Country broke and in debt to the States forever?
Not even the Arabs can keep up the play for this long before the planet tires of them.
The situation in the Middle East is contradictory and can be addressed from different standpoints. On the one hand, we can and probably should intervene and end the chaos with one decisive operation, at least for now.
On the other hand, we should give a chance for local governments to fortify their own defence and through a chain of alliances do the job. Amercan image will be preserved then and international community will finally understand America has something apart from brute force to offer.
On the other hand, we should give a chance for local governments to fortify their own defence and through a chain of alliances do the job. Amercan image will be preserved then and international community will finally understand America has something apart from brute force to offer.
1
I have it on the best authority: It's the JV. It's on the run. It's being rolled back. We have a plan to destroy, roll back, contain, or whatever it-and it's all going to be done in exactly 3 years with a pre-announcement that it will-Houdini like-be done with our hands tied behind our back. Talk about new Tales of the Arabian Knight.
12
It has nothing to do with the U.S.. All our use of military should be to protect our country, not other nations religious jihadis. We are acting as an Imperial power. Doing so will make us a target not protect us. Fundamentalist belief cannot be eradicated, nor any belief. It seems our military leaders have not thought of an end game in this ever expanding endless war. It is a foolish arrogance fueled by poor judgement about what it is we are capable of solving by entering into other nations affairs. Pull out now!
33
That theory may have been relevant 500 hundred years ago, but as western civbiksatiin is based on worldwide trade, any regional threat affects our country. As the Ideology of Radical Islam is already here, and is spreading like a wildfire in the 90 countries who ISIS gets recruits from and has allowed them to amass 180,000 today; maybe it is time we actually did something instead of falsely claiming victory.
2
And what exactly do you think will happen when these human impersonators get their paws on a couple of nuclear warheads, courtesy of Pakistan or North Korea? Will you still think it's none of our business when they nuke London, Moscow, Paris or New York?
2
World war with terrorism? Who is responsible? Pentagon and our government could destroy them 'with your hands behind your back' half a year ago. But they did not. Now the problem is too huge and needs at times more money than before. CIA in cooperation with Saudi Arabia wanted to fight Al-Assad government in Syria, but they have created a monster.
Islamic States of America? Never!
Islamic States of America? Never!
2
Conflating the Da'ish with Islam was not a good construct. We in the west need to refer to those terrorist by the name other middle eastern countries use to identify them. Why help to recruit fighters in the cause of Da'ish by associating them with Islam. Isolating them with language used by nations in the area, I think, is the first step in defeating their perverted cause.
We need to stand with or better yet, stand behind the people of the middle east as they confront the Da'ish.
I say we "follow" as opposed to "lead " in this undertaking and "listen" to what those nations in the middle east wish to do to eradicate "their" problem.
We need to stand with or better yet, stand behind the people of the middle east as they confront the Da'ish.
I say we "follow" as opposed to "lead " in this undertaking and "listen" to what those nations in the middle east wish to do to eradicate "their" problem.
5
JRS, with respect, the US has been following ever since Obama's Cairo speech. The result is that the scourge of radical Islam is spreading pretty much out of control. And radical Islamic terrorists are "our" problem as well as the problem for all people who want religious freedom.
1
The most important cause of these acts of violence is not something the US did, did not do, or Israel, or anyone else. And it is almost never mentioned in news analysis.
The nations involved have had population growth that has vastly outstripped economic growth. This has produced millions of the most violent type people, regardless of location: young, unemployed, poorly-educated men with little hope for a better future without fighting for it.
However, we also have many very hot and dry nations that are growing hotter and drier. Heat and thirst increase anger and violence. Hunger increases violence. All reduce the ability to think about a range of options and consequences of immediate reaction.
Deprivation leads to depravity.
And it doesn't help when your elders train you to be living bombs. Muslim lives do matter, but they seem to matter least to other Muslims.
The nations involved have had population growth that has vastly outstripped economic growth. This has produced millions of the most violent type people, regardless of location: young, unemployed, poorly-educated men with little hope for a better future without fighting for it.
However, we also have many very hot and dry nations that are growing hotter and drier. Heat and thirst increase anger and violence. Hunger increases violence. All reduce the ability to think about a range of options and consequences of immediate reaction.
Deprivation leads to depravity.
And it doesn't help when your elders train you to be living bombs. Muslim lives do matter, but they seem to matter least to other Muslims.
21
Quilty
To paraphrase Golda Meir, there will be peace when extremist Muslim parents love their children more than they hate the infidels.
If these barbarians would lay down their weapons there would be peace. Surely the civilized world would rather spend trillions to feed these people than to spend trillions on weapons to kill them.
To paraphrase Golda Meir, there will be peace when extremist Muslim parents love their children more than they hate the infidels.
If these barbarians would lay down their weapons there would be peace. Surely the civilized world would rather spend trillions to feed these people than to spend trillions on weapons to kill them.
1
Just common sense that after years, trillions of dollars wasted and thousands of lives lost that we would do more war on terror. Perhaps its time for a different approach? Give peace a chance. No it's not out of weakness, it's out real common sense and humanity.
4
Perhaps we can do nothing and hope for the best. However, if the evil ISIS wind up winning they will not stop in the middle east - they will carry their perpetual war to any non-Islam country and attempt to slowly and steadily grind it down. This is their stated goal.
So doing nothing certainly carries difficult consequences for future generations.
So doing nothing certainly carries difficult consequences for future generations.
3
"No matter how many troops we have in place or how long they stay, we cannot impose a parliamentary democracy there any more than the insurgents can impose a theocracy."
Nick Clooney
Nick Clooney
5
I am pretty sure our western backed FREE SYRIAN ARMY joined ISIS. Also these days I am missing our death toll in Syria reported by a group in london with lot of connections.
4
Thanks, Project for the New American Century--the soi-dise "smartest people in the room"--including Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and (yes!) Jeb Bush. Your plot to premise an invasion of Iraq on 9/11 (which Iraq had NOTHING to do with). We are reaping what you sowed: there was no Al Quaeda in Iraq until the U.S.-led invasion, and ISIS is the successor in interest to Al Quaeda.
You made the mess, blame the current administration which tried to clean things up, and expect others to pick up after you. What goes around should have come around to YOU, and not to the United States, the rest of the Middle East, and heaven knows where else.
You made the mess, blame the current administration which tried to clean things up, and expect others to pick up after you. What goes around should have come around to YOU, and not to the United States, the rest of the Middle East, and heaven knows where else.
5
Bush handed Iraq to Obama on a silver platter, and Obama did what he's done with every foreign policy challenge he's been faced with: he fumbled it.
There was no Islamic State in Iraq, Syria, Libya, etc in 2009. But ignored by our amateur president, then dismissed as the "JV team," it's become a regional threat. Sorry Carl, that is Obama's fault.
There was no Islamic State in Iraq, Syria, Libya, etc in 2009. But ignored by our amateur president, then dismissed as the "JV team," it's become a regional threat. Sorry Carl, that is Obama's fault.
10
I disagree, but you can't talk sense to a racist and one of today's GOP, which offers no viable alternatives except war forever, both on the U.S. populace (the "war on terror") and the world at large.
1
This is the direct result of getting rid of Sadaam Hussein. The harm GWB did to our country by that action is becoming immeasurable.
17
Who but the US? seems to be a popular charge with regard to fighting terrorism.
Who but the US includes multiple nations, that, like the US, have been attacked inside their national territory.
Who includes the nation that may be the most frequent target of terrorism, India. It also includes the UK, which worked with the US in much of the middle east, and has experienced deadly terrorist attacks.
Who is France as well, active in west and central Africa, the areas of it former colonial empire - the US media has a terrible time reporting on European nations that don't speak English, and Africa, and here we have a European nation that doesn't speak English in Africa. So no one knows about it here.
Who is also Russia, which has been doing it since the early 1990s. We just forgot about that because of Ukraine.
Just like we forgot about Nigerian girls. Which is bad because Nigeria is Africa's most populous nation, and incompetent, and is where Boko Harem bumps into Al Qaeda and ISIL.
Then we have the confusion of Pakistan. We think that North Korea would be the likely source of nuclear terrorism, but we should think about Pakistan.
China has also played a role in its territory, Indonesia and Philippines as well.
When you look at these nations, realize that they are the most populous nations in the world, more than half of the population of the world. Don't confuse US media ignorance with absence of events.
And don't isolate Russia. WW3 may depend on them.
Who but the US includes multiple nations, that, like the US, have been attacked inside their national territory.
Who includes the nation that may be the most frequent target of terrorism, India. It also includes the UK, which worked with the US in much of the middle east, and has experienced deadly terrorist attacks.
Who is France as well, active in west and central Africa, the areas of it former colonial empire - the US media has a terrible time reporting on European nations that don't speak English, and Africa, and here we have a European nation that doesn't speak English in Africa. So no one knows about it here.
Who is also Russia, which has been doing it since the early 1990s. We just forgot about that because of Ukraine.
Just like we forgot about Nigerian girls. Which is bad because Nigeria is Africa's most populous nation, and incompetent, and is where Boko Harem bumps into Al Qaeda and ISIL.
Then we have the confusion of Pakistan. We think that North Korea would be the likely source of nuclear terrorism, but we should think about Pakistan.
China has also played a role in its territory, Indonesia and Philippines as well.
When you look at these nations, realize that they are the most populous nations in the world, more than half of the population of the world. Don't confuse US media ignorance with absence of events.
And don't isolate Russia. WW3 may depend on them.
4
Our government and the media is working overboard to keep our attention on this ISIS "threat". When you consider that we are told that ISIS numbers 25,000 to 30,000 members total and upon doing a quick check on wikipedia see that the Iraqi Armed Forces number 271,500 active and 528,500 reserve members. Add to that the Saudi Armed Forces and armed forces of other Arab countries and there are more than enough military to defend against the 30,000 ISIS members. Why are we even involved? Are we Saudi Arabia's army or is this ISIS implied threat just being used to get our forces into Syria to topple Syria's president, Assad?
6
That's the problem: aid dependency. Why fight your enemies if you can wait long enough for someone else to come in and defend you. Otherwise they're heartless racists who don't care about the suffering in [our country] like the do in [some country where our soldiers are] [some country with lots of oil] [some country named Israel]?"
Why is it that there are ever growing masses of refugees from conflict zones? Part of it is sheer population increase, but that doesn't explain the increase in proportion of the displaced. Again, run until you are sort of safe, where you will be sort of fed, and eventually someone else will do something, somehow.
In the past, civil wars were generally that - wars where the combatants were generally from that country, and those combatants included volunteers from the formerly civilian population on a large scale, and non-voluntary draftees by the hundreds of thousands.
Now it's run away until the rich countries show they care about our problems as if they were their problems. Or else they're racists and our children will hate them and bring the war to their houses for not saving our houses.
Florence Nightingale was actually an outspoken critic of provision of indiscriminate aid in war zones. Anything done to make the cost of war less expensive increases the ability to wage war, prolongs war, and gives someone else to blame for the consequences of war.
Why is it that there are ever growing masses of refugees from conflict zones? Part of it is sheer population increase, but that doesn't explain the increase in proportion of the displaced. Again, run until you are sort of safe, where you will be sort of fed, and eventually someone else will do something, somehow.
In the past, civil wars were generally that - wars where the combatants were generally from that country, and those combatants included volunteers from the formerly civilian population on a large scale, and non-voluntary draftees by the hundreds of thousands.
Now it's run away until the rich countries show they care about our problems as if they were their problems. Or else they're racists and our children will hate them and bring the war to their houses for not saving our houses.
Florence Nightingale was actually an outspoken critic of provision of indiscriminate aid in war zones. Anything done to make the cost of war less expensive increases the ability to wage war, prolongs war, and gives someone else to blame for the consequences of war.
7
We have the technology to shut down all the internet traffic coming out of that area and the ability to shut down their websites. Why aren't we doing this?
7
War is not (and never is) the answer. Thoughtful and nuanced guidelines for speech might be. Do we really need to impose our hate speech on an otherwise peaceful religion? I'm open to other solutions but let's start here. I'm getting old and fearing that I will never be able to tour the ancient lands in security as I once hoped as a child to do.
5
Realistically, there is only one sane alternative for the US: completely pull out from any further involvement in the Middle East and allow the Middle East (and Europe) to deal with this growing menace. If at some point in the future when World War III (Isam vs the World) breaks out we can consider getting involved.
7
Ridiculous, we're in the MIC dream: endless unwinnable war, enemies who melt away, then spread. Ultimate evil, requiring drones and billions.
Is it possible to thwart the war machine and thriving establishment built up around it? As more citizens fully realize we are the world's biggest killers, bullies and provocateurs can we mobilize to stop this runaway train?
We've got to figure out how to stop our own hydra, but what resistance will be heard or heeded?
They are tuned in only to their own echo chamber. How not to despair.
Is it possible to thwart the war machine and thriving establishment built up around it? As more citizens fully realize we are the world's biggest killers, bullies and provocateurs can we mobilize to stop this runaway train?
We've got to figure out how to stop our own hydra, but what resistance will be heard or heeded?
They are tuned in only to their own echo chamber. How not to despair.
6
This new Caliphate concept is a puzzle for American thinking. How often do we hear US generals propose the same old solutions. There is a terribly need for a totally new approach to this kind of group. Now longer will the old methods, which did not work in Afghanistan and Iraq work. The total American military complex must wake up to a different day. It is time to get out of the military straight-jacket which produced the mess of Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. ISIS is not going to invade America. A few jihadists returning is not an invasion. Yet all we hear from military persons is boots on the ground. Do they really think another ground war is the answer. This is a different group-and calls for different answers. Someone should be asking "what is the mandate in Iraq, Syria" and why does American military need to be involved. American troops have died in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan without any clear idea of why they were there or why they were asked to go in harms way. Certainly, the world must face ISIS and branches with a new kind of thinking-both politically and militarily. If ever there was a time for "new think" military leaders to emerge in US it is now. If that does not happen, America may be in for more tragic engagements with tragic results. Since US backing the Iraqi Shia army has shown how futile that is-and how politically damaging it is-a new think about that needs to surface.
7
ISIS should not be given time and space to grow in other parts of the world. The U.S. should use its influence in the Middle East, Pakistan and Afghanistan and see that ISIS does not start its branch in those countries. After all, prevention is better than cure. With the death of Osama bin laden, Al Qeda has not produced any charismatic leader and as a result, it has steadily lost its cadre. ISIS has utilized this opportunity to attract finance and terrorists from Al Qaeda.
Need of the hour is a full scale war on ISIS, to root them out completely, before they spread out their deadly tentacles to other parts of the world. The U.S. should, naturally, take the lead. The question whether the U.S. should send its troops to Syria and Iraq should depend upon the progress made during the progress of war. The U.S. should limit its role, as of now, to air strikes and providing intelligence to its Allies in the Middle East, and allow them to carry out ground operations. Sooner the better.
Need of the hour is a full scale war on ISIS, to root them out completely, before they spread out their deadly tentacles to other parts of the world. The U.S. should, naturally, take the lead. The question whether the U.S. should send its troops to Syria and Iraq should depend upon the progress made during the progress of war. The U.S. should limit its role, as of now, to air strikes and providing intelligence to its Allies in the Middle East, and allow them to carry out ground operations. Sooner the better.
1
As I write this, 300 US Marines, in Iraq to train the Iraqis, are being surrounded by ISIS fighters. How will the President find a way to avoid all-out war if even one is hurt, or killed or G-d forbid, captured? More work-place violence? It is time to bring 50,000 troops back to Iraq and eliminate these Islamists.
7
No it's not time to bring 50,000 troops back to Iraq.
Our US Marines are the best. Our US military forces would not put our Marines at risk. Where are you getting your information?
How many ISIS fighters? Where exactly?
This clearly demonstrates why the USA should NEVER have been in IRAQ in the first place.
Our US Marines are the best. Our US military forces would not put our Marines at risk. Where are you getting your information?
How many ISIS fighters? Where exactly?
This clearly demonstrates why the USA should NEVER have been in IRAQ in the first place.
8
larry- are you referring to this incident a day ago?
"A U.S. defence official said the Iraqi forces had stopped the attack and re-secured the facility.
"Coalition forces were several kilometres from the attack and at no stage were they under direct threat from this action," the official said.
About 320 U.S. Marines are training members of the Iraqi 7th Division at the base, which has been struck by mortar fire on at least one previous occasion since December.
Iraq's Defence Ministry said on its website the Iraqi army killed eight assailants near the base, which is about 85 km (50 miles) northwest of Ramadi."
"A U.S. defence official said the Iraqi forces had stopped the attack and re-secured the facility.
"Coalition forces were several kilometres from the attack and at no stage were they under direct threat from this action," the official said.
About 320 U.S. Marines are training members of the Iraqi 7th Division at the base, which has been struck by mortar fire on at least one previous occasion since December.
Iraq's Defence Ministry said on its website the Iraqi army killed eight assailants near the base, which is about 85 km (50 miles) northwest of Ramadi."
6
No larry, it is time to bring the 300 US Marines home for and to squash for good the fool's errand that the old fools W Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld set into motion.
Get a grip. Face up to a losing situation when it is obvious that the task is NOT worth doing and we cannot afford it anymore.
www.costofwar.com
Get a grip. Face up to a losing situation when it is obvious that the task is NOT worth doing and we cannot afford it anymore.
www.costofwar.com
8
Don't you just wish sometimes that the Russians were holding down the fort in Afghanistan, Saddam in Iraq, Gaddafi in Libya, and Assad in Syria? Maybe these countries just aren't ready for freedom and democracy. Egypt had a chance and whom do they turn to? The Muslim Brotherhood. Thankfully that didn't last long.
17
My dad lives in Russia, and when we spoke on Skype today, he said the exact same thing.
3
It'll take several generations for modernity and freedom to actually occur over there. Best not to hold your breath...
2
Ditto in most of America.
Expanding an organization, any organization, requires money. The larger this organization becomes, the more it takes. It also requires political and societal support. So where is this money and support coming from? Is it coming from members of the "peaceful" islamic communities now spread across the world?
8
You and a lot of other people on this blog are sadly mistaken. ISIS wants to and will create its own money system. Currently it just takes money from those whom it controls. When they have no more, they will issue its own currency to those who carry out its wishes.
Probably the only reason ISIS is able to take control is the naivety in power of those who think society is based on money, and that money is some absolute controlled by people who are invincible. The opposite is true, and ISIS realizes that. When you are in control you can issue your own currency and the people under control have to use it in their daily business.
The ISIS leaders know this, and are actually relying on the ignorance of those under the control of the Western and Middle Eastern money systems - their confidence that money is all it takes to be in power - to take control through force and then introduce their own reward system that those under their control must abide by.
Power controls money, not the other way around.
Probably the only reason ISIS is able to take control is the naivety in power of those who think society is based on money, and that money is some absolute controlled by people who are invincible. The opposite is true, and ISIS realizes that. When you are in control you can issue your own currency and the people under control have to use it in their daily business.
The ISIS leaders know this, and are actually relying on the ignorance of those under the control of the Western and Middle Eastern money systems - their confidence that money is all it takes to be in power - to take control through force and then introduce their own reward system that those under their control must abide by.
Power controls money, not the other way around.
1
It's from wealthy backers in Saudi Arabia, if it's Wahhabi, and drumming up a pogrom against people who in fact are peaceful is not going to help.
4
Is ISIS "pushing" into other countries? Or is ISIS support being "pulled" into other countries by independent groups and individuals who want ISIS support?
The answer is vitally important. If independent groups and individuals in other countries are eager to invite ISIS' support, that means ISIS' ideas, or methods are already seen as attractive by people who may have their own agendas.
And ironically, the sale of ideas was supposed to be OUR method of spreading Democracy. But don't we pride ourselves on being the Masters of Free Markets? If so, how can we be losing in a modern marketplace to the un- and anti-modern Jihadists of ISIS?
I'm asking rhetorically. But either those people who claim they are leading us are incompetent and incapable of asking the right questions. Or they are deliberately not asking the right questions, and discouraging the rest of us from asking the right questions. Because for the Military-Industrial-Government-Complex, the identify of The Enemy is arbitrary. The goal is to keep the rest of us right here in The Home Country "colonized" exploiting our treasure and blood, for their profit.
The answer is vitally important. If independent groups and individuals in other countries are eager to invite ISIS' support, that means ISIS' ideas, or methods are already seen as attractive by people who may have their own agendas.
And ironically, the sale of ideas was supposed to be OUR method of spreading Democracy. But don't we pride ourselves on being the Masters of Free Markets? If so, how can we be losing in a modern marketplace to the un- and anti-modern Jihadists of ISIS?
I'm asking rhetorically. But either those people who claim they are leading us are incompetent and incapable of asking the right questions. Or they are deliberately not asking the right questions, and discouraging the rest of us from asking the right questions. Because for the Military-Industrial-Government-Complex, the identify of The Enemy is arbitrary. The goal is to keep the rest of us right here in The Home Country "colonized" exploiting our treasure and blood, for their profit.
3
"Global war on terror"? If do not have the wit or the courage to name the enemy, we will lose. There have been dark ages before, there can be a dark age again, and a renaissance is not guaranteed.
7
ISIS could not have been so ruthlessly efficient and successful in spreading beyond its base without a money trail from donors and a supply of fighters from around the globe. Iraqi leaders are shaking in their pants and wanting ground US troops. With the congressional approval in last week for ground troops, the President has new military options but it is also time to make peace with lesser former enemies like the Taliban in Afghanistan and the Shia militia in Iraq and block the channels of flow of fighters. If not face the continuous sprouting limbs of ISIS beyond its base while decimating its enemies within the base. The urgency of now begs for a multi-pronged approach.
3
Western Elites have a doctrine, but they cannot share it because it excludes everyone else – they want to own everything and then control everybody else with the money system. Technically, this is quite easy for those in control of a fiat money system to accomplish.
The problem is that their End State is impractical, and the closer they come to achieving it the more political backlash they create. If they ever succeed, it will foment a revolution, and already has created a politically polarized society with rising hostility between the two political camps in America: those who are seeking the End State and those who are opposing it.
Largely, the Elites simply deny the validity of any contrary doctrine – they refuse to recognize grievances or the reality on which any contrary doctrine is based.
This denial in the face of such uprisings as the Arab Spring and Russophiles in Eastern Ukraine leads them to send out the US military at the slightest challenge to the validity of the Elites’ own doctrine of world control by their NWO institutions, without considering why adversarial doctrines are gaining popularity.
The problem is that their End State is impractical, and the closer they come to achieving it the more political backlash they create. If they ever succeed, it will foment a revolution, and already has created a politically polarized society with rising hostility between the two political camps in America: those who are seeking the End State and those who are opposing it.
Largely, the Elites simply deny the validity of any contrary doctrine – they refuse to recognize grievances or the reality on which any contrary doctrine is based.
This denial in the face of such uprisings as the Arab Spring and Russophiles in Eastern Ukraine leads them to send out the US military at the slightest challenge to the validity of the Elites’ own doctrine of world control by their NWO institutions, without considering why adversarial doctrines are gaining popularity.
3
There needs to be an effective branding campaign to deprive them of the legitimacy of Islam. The New York Times, the BBC, and other news media, White House press releases, politicians all across the spectrum, and President Obama should repeatedly and consistently refer to "the pseudo-Islamic organization, ISIS".
5
US cant win this ideological war. Leave this to local people.
12
Global war against fascism. Global war against Communism. Global war against Islamic fundamentalism...
The names change, but the tune remains the same. Our economy depends on perpetual war, because we do not encourage industry to make useful products that improve peoples lives. Much of our so-called foreign aid is military materiel, used and new, to ensure the flames of war never die out anywhere.
Have we wiped out drug gangs? Have we wiped out the Mafia? Organized groups of disaffected people are made use of by organized groups of very dangerous people--often in our government. Islamic insurgencies were developed by our government as proxies to do our dirty work, and they have now decided to bite the hands that fed them.
The names change, but the tune remains the same. Our economy depends on perpetual war, because we do not encourage industry to make useful products that improve peoples lives. Much of our so-called foreign aid is military materiel, used and new, to ensure the flames of war never die out anywhere.
Have we wiped out drug gangs? Have we wiped out the Mafia? Organized groups of disaffected people are made use of by organized groups of very dangerous people--often in our government. Islamic insurgencies were developed by our government as proxies to do our dirty work, and they have now decided to bite the hands that fed them.
4
We are engaged in a pseudo war. A real war would be something akin to what the allies did to the towns and cities occupied by the Germans during WWII Namely, they carpet bombed them disregarding collateral civilian damage and death to civilian populations.
The US will never adopt this morally abject policy, so we are confined to a token war dropping a bomb here and there on a truck, a motorcycle, a tank, an artillery piece, a building, or on a small number of isolated militants.
The point is that the only people that are winning this 'war' are the companies that make the bombs, the planes- the armament industry, and the politicos that promote them.
Nobody know what to do, so maybe we should just tend to our own gardens, and forget about the war on terror, and let the Islamic states handle their own problems. After all, it's like the what happens when the bacteria in a Petri dish culture dish follow an J shaped growth curve, which over which thrive and expand until they become so numerous they meet environmental resistances which chock out the nutritive resources that support them. That is what will happen to this unstable entity called ISIS. Right now they are in the beginning of the curve rapidly expanding because we are nourishing them. Take us out of the picture, and allow their environment-Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Lebanon- to chock them out.
The US will never adopt this morally abject policy, so we are confined to a token war dropping a bomb here and there on a truck, a motorcycle, a tank, an artillery piece, a building, or on a small number of isolated militants.
The point is that the only people that are winning this 'war' are the companies that make the bombs, the planes- the armament industry, and the politicos that promote them.
Nobody know what to do, so maybe we should just tend to our own gardens, and forget about the war on terror, and let the Islamic states handle their own problems. After all, it's like the what happens when the bacteria in a Petri dish culture dish follow an J shaped growth curve, which over which thrive and expand until they become so numerous they meet environmental resistances which chock out the nutritive resources that support them. That is what will happen to this unstable entity called ISIS. Right now they are in the beginning of the curve rapidly expanding because we are nourishing them. Take us out of the picture, and allow their environment-Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Lebanon- to chock them out.
10
For over 35 years the Shia Muslims are being massacred in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, and Bahrain and they are crying for relief from this genocidal movement; they were ignored because of the influence of Saudi Arabia; the incubator of this skewed and extremist interpretation of Islam (Wahhabism). It was also ignored because Shia Muslims were put in the same basket as Iran (Netanyahu’s boogeyman) and nothing could be further from truth. (Iran is a nationalistic country)
Hopefully now the world can see the true face of the Wahhabis newest incarnation – ISIS.
In 1979 we (CIA) along with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan’ ISI formed the Taliban to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan. It gave us Another 5 different terrorist organizations (LeJ, SSP, Jundullah, ASWJ, JI, TTP etc.) to deal with and resulted in Bin Laden’s Al-Qaeda, Al-Qaeda has morphed in various countries since its inception.
One commonality with all the terrorism nexus is the Wahhabi interpretation of Islam forged by the Saudis. They have used their money and Ideology worldwide. Another fact is that there are no conflicts involving Muslims where you would not find the Wahhabi interpretation of Islam and Saudi funding to promote it. Some of the countries where it is being promoted by Saudi money are Malaysia, Indonesia, Uzbekistan, China, Caucuses, Russia, Chechnya, Tajikistan, Turkey, India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bahrain, Iraq, Syria, Nigeria, Lebanon, Chad, Angola, Kenya, and others.
Hopefully now the world can see the true face of the Wahhabis newest incarnation – ISIS.
In 1979 we (CIA) along with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan’ ISI formed the Taliban to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan. It gave us Another 5 different terrorist organizations (LeJ, SSP, Jundullah, ASWJ, JI, TTP etc.) to deal with and resulted in Bin Laden’s Al-Qaeda, Al-Qaeda has morphed in various countries since its inception.
One commonality with all the terrorism nexus is the Wahhabi interpretation of Islam forged by the Saudis. They have used their money and Ideology worldwide. Another fact is that there are no conflicts involving Muslims where you would not find the Wahhabi interpretation of Islam and Saudi funding to promote it. Some of the countries where it is being promoted by Saudi money are Malaysia, Indonesia, Uzbekistan, China, Caucuses, Russia, Chechnya, Tajikistan, Turkey, India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bahrain, Iraq, Syria, Nigeria, Lebanon, Chad, Angola, Kenya, and others.
16
Cutting off Saudi funding for Wahhabism (the violent sect that Saudi kingpin Bin Laden and his hijacker pals embraced) would do more against terrorism than all the bloodshed so far or yet to come from the rest of us. But the Saudi role was rendered invisible after 9/11 by Bush, with his family and business connections to them, and his administration; and so far Obama hasn't stood up to them, either. When will he? When will we?
13
I cannot agree with you more, and in order to stand up to ISIS we must stand with the ones who are fighting ISIS on the ground for us. They are not the Saudis, UAE, Qataris, Turkish, Jordanians, or even Israelis. ISIS is sitting peacefully next to Israeli forces and neither ISIS is firing towards Israel nor, Israel is helping us fight ISIS by simply blowing them up. I wonder Why and the same goes for the Funders like Saudia, UAE, and Qatar. Turkey, our sole Muslim Nato ally just do not want to hurt ISIS and would not allow Nato to use its base for attacks on ISIS.
3
And soon ISIS will be found under our beds too. We can find enemies anytime we need one.
5
I hope that someone is following the money that is funding the ISIS operation. One of the most effective ways to curtail aggressive movements for any reason is to shut off the sources of funding. What are the sources of their monetary backing and what is going to be done about separating the aggressors from their money?
9
The countries in the region should have the motivation and the capacity to contain the threat posed by ISIS. It is definitely a threat to the regions in the Middle East and the Maghreb.
The U.S. should tell allies in the region to sink or swim. It's their fight and their responsibility.
The U.S. should tell allies in the region to sink or swim. It's their fight and their responsibility.
13
Well, I guess I was wrong when I argued with a friend who strongly supported Bush's planned invasion of Iraq, telling her that not only would it not be over in 3 months but that it would set off a tragic conflagration that would take a decade to resolve. Apparently I greatly underestimated the cost of Bush's throwing matches into an explosive situation. And for those who didn't like Saddam Hussein-- you should have thought of that before you Republicans aided and strengthened him in the Reagan 1980s.
18
No, you weren't entirely wrong. In Summary, Rumsfeld's war plan was inadequate to secure the country. Tactically it was a success but without sufficient ground forces to secure the country, it was a strategic failure. Next, Paul Bremer's debaathification program where in the space of two days he disabled the Iraqi government and disbanded the Iraqi army sent 800,000 soldiers home with their weapons, and the resistance started within 72 hours. Later, Petraeus' Bribes to the tribal leaders ended the resistance. Finally Obama abandoned Iraq to Maliki, who was an Iranian puppet. Maliki persecuted the Sunnis, which gave rise to Isis.
Do we understand yet that this war will outlive us all?
That there are no simple answers?
That it will keep right on sprouting new heads, and that cutting off one head will only cause more heads to multiply?
Secure borders, robust nation-states and constant vigilance are the MINIMUM requirements for containing the threat.
I once said it would take fifty years to determine if taking down Saddam would be seen historically as a good or bad idea. One thing we already know: destabilizing Iraq was a very bad idea.
If we are to learn any lessons at all from what we have experienced, really since the Clinton administration, it is to tread lightly when it comes to undermining the existing administrative and military apparatus of sovereign nations. Not only do such acts breed intense resentment, they also allow the infiltration of stateless sects who dig in like parasites and use the host as their own tool to spread virulently.
That is a very clear lesson of the initial approach to the "war on terror". a lesson which absolutely must be applied going forward. Syria is now destabilized and as such is a breeding ground for militant extremism, coupled with the very real threat that those militants will expropriate the very same apparatus a robust nation-state would use to protect itself against them.
That is the nightmare scenario and it is unfolding with expedience even as we debate the extent to which this is "our" fight.
It is everyone's fight. Pick a side.
That there are no simple answers?
That it will keep right on sprouting new heads, and that cutting off one head will only cause more heads to multiply?
Secure borders, robust nation-states and constant vigilance are the MINIMUM requirements for containing the threat.
I once said it would take fifty years to determine if taking down Saddam would be seen historically as a good or bad idea. One thing we already know: destabilizing Iraq was a very bad idea.
If we are to learn any lessons at all from what we have experienced, really since the Clinton administration, it is to tread lightly when it comes to undermining the existing administrative and military apparatus of sovereign nations. Not only do such acts breed intense resentment, they also allow the infiltration of stateless sects who dig in like parasites and use the host as their own tool to spread virulently.
That is a very clear lesson of the initial approach to the "war on terror". a lesson which absolutely must be applied going forward. Syria is now destabilized and as such is a breeding ground for militant extremism, coupled with the very real threat that those militants will expropriate the very same apparatus a robust nation-state would use to protect itself against them.
That is the nightmare scenario and it is unfolding with expedience even as we debate the extent to which this is "our" fight.
It is everyone's fight. Pick a side.
17
This is great news for US conservatives, whose economic program has long been keeping the US in a permanent state of undeclared war against undefined enemies, financed by trillion-dollar deficits, which accomplish nothing except to inflate the profits of Wall Street and to allow the conservative Big Brother to curb the rights of ordinary Americans while expanding the rights of the wealthy. For the US conservative, ISIS is pure gold!
17
Also gives the neocons the "pretext" they wanted to end SS and Medicare, in order to use the money for war.
No country in the world welcomes terrorists. They know very well, that they will destabilize their governments and societies . The majority of the population in Islamic states will turn against them and perhaps sooner than we think. They will not see American soldiers on the ground which usually gives them an excuse to unite against America. Moderate Muslims will make them disappear. Once they make up their minds and understand that their very existence is at stake.
6
Is it global income inequality that is contributing to the growing number of farflung people who are joining ISIS? Is it a sense of hopelessness with their lives? Are they seeking adventure because their lives are empty or boring?
My life is no picnic, but I can't imagine ever being attracted to this kind of life -- and death.
My life is no picnic, but I can't imagine ever being attracted to this kind of life -- and death.
1
And our president still refuses to call a spade a spade. Terrorism, especially Islamic terrorism, is what it is. Ruthless, barbaric, and ready to murder innocent civilians in the name of their perverted religion. After 6 years of denial, it appears that we will have to wait for the next president to take action against the enemies of America.
8
A few dozen experts who exist could eliminate half the so-called "warriors" in a few weeks. At least a third. 10K or so.
I don't know why the President and Pentagon doesn't say "go". It's a certainty. They will be gone. And shortly after, the rest of their flock will flee like little birds in the desert wind.
I admit it. There is no love on this end for the enemy. They have to go, and we must make it happen, soon. There is little time to waste now.
I don't know why the President and Pentagon doesn't say "go". It's a certainty. They will be gone. And shortly after, the rest of their flock will flee like little birds in the desert wind.
I admit it. There is no love on this end for the enemy. They have to go, and we must make it happen, soon. There is little time to waste now.
2
ISIS is a, virulent, pathological response to a century of irritations by Western Powers in the region.
To add more irritation will not cure it.
The French revolution cut of the heads of many more people than ISIS, but settled down, within 4 years. Then, foreign interference, bend to wipe out this "cutting off the kings head bunch ofrevolutionaries", brought Napoleon to power.
More and larger wars followed.
Sometimes it is better to let things run their course.
To add more irritation will not cure it.
The French revolution cut of the heads of many more people than ISIS, but settled down, within 4 years. Then, foreign interference, bend to wipe out this "cutting off the kings head bunch ofrevolutionaries", brought Napoleon to power.
More and larger wars followed.
Sometimes it is better to let things run their course.
4
This obsessing over ISIS is maddening, and unwarranted. ISIS is not a threat to the government or the people of the United States. It's self-proclaimed Caliphate in Iraq and Syria, sans Baghdad and Damascus, is a joke. Its professed supporters in Egypt, Libya, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, et al, are going nowhere.
There is zero rationale for the U.S. to fight with ISIS (which only gives them a reason for existence and more recruiting power). Let's protect our own, wherever they are, period. ISIS is a vicious dog with rabies but it's not in our neighborhood and can't get here. Let's help any and all nations who ask for help to contain and exterminate this menace.
There is zero rationale for the U.S. to fight with ISIS (which only gives them a reason for existence and more recruiting power). Let's protect our own, wherever they are, period. ISIS is a vicious dog with rabies but it's not in our neighborhood and can't get here. Let's help any and all nations who ask for help to contain and exterminate this menace.
15
How do you know it "can't get here"?
1
How naive. Will you be joining in the "protection of our own"?
We are living in a very small world where this plague is spreading as we speak. To close our eyes to this fact would be suicide.
1
Partisanship has become the norm. From health care to immigration, from infrastructure to the national debt and homeland security, we can't seem to agree on anything. And now we're debating what to do about ISIS? If we can't resolve our own basic problems at home who in the world will trust us to make international decisions?
6
Our time on this planet is so short, we blink in and out of existence so fast, and yet our thoughts are dominated by ISIS, war, murder and mayhem. I just wish that I could visit the Earth in a thousand years and see if Humanity has learned anything at all. We might even be free of the scourge of religion by that time!
10
As a veteran of both Iraq and Afghanistan War, I see the greatest enemy in fighting ISIS to be ourselves. Specifically, our attempts to overcomplicate the issues by bringing in Islam, morality, ethics, political correctness, coalition building.
This has led us away from the nature of War and how to win it. War is by nature, immoral, unethical and can be won by the party who is single mindedly brutally aggressive in pursuing victory. This was clearly demonstrated in WWII when the US won an overwhelming victory over forces of millions.
ISIS is only 20,000-31,500 in strength. If our Nation choose to defeat them brutally and aggressively, it can be done easily. But unfortunately, we have instead engaged in proving political correctness, moral superiority and international approval that has complicated our strategy tied our hands in combat and resulted in this quagmire. Our greatest enemy is ourselves.
This has led us away from the nature of War and how to win it. War is by nature, immoral, unethical and can be won by the party who is single mindedly brutally aggressive in pursuing victory. This was clearly demonstrated in WWII when the US won an overwhelming victory over forces of millions.
ISIS is only 20,000-31,500 in strength. If our Nation choose to defeat them brutally and aggressively, it can be done easily. But unfortunately, we have instead engaged in proving political correctness, moral superiority and international approval that has complicated our strategy tied our hands in combat and resulted in this quagmire. Our greatest enemy is ourselves.
72
Much of this is true, but the U.S. did not defeat a force of millions. Your knowledge of the eastern front is lacking. However, Joe Stalin was far more cold blooded than you suggest, which supports your thesis
And, Daesh, any opponent, is not a find population. I have a vivid memory hearing how a marine said Fallujah could be cleaned up with real gloves off take out mosques fighting. Fallujah was cleaned up, briefly, by doing business, not ultimately by arms. Now it is under ISIS control. von Clausewitz. War is the continuation of politics by other means. That is why a policy would be nice.
And, Daesh, any opponent, is not a find population. I have a vivid memory hearing how a marine said Fallujah could be cleaned up with real gloves off take out mosques fighting. Fallujah was cleaned up, briefly, by doing business, not ultimately by arms. Now it is under ISIS control. von Clausewitz. War is the continuation of politics by other means. That is why a policy would be nice.
3
What would you do exactly that isn't already being done?
With all due respect, please let us know your plan for an" easy defeat". I'm sure there are many throughout the world who are honestly curious!
2
It is way past time for the Administration to present a detailed strategy with clear attainable objectives and most importantly lay out what "success' would look like as we get ever deeper militarily involved in the region. Trillions have been spent and tens of thousands of lives destroyed, and we the people have yet to receive a clear and detailed strategy of where we are heading in these never ending and ever expanding wars.
11
Obama just needs to set forth the rationale for the military intervention. Let the military present the "detailed strategy". Republicans keep waiting for a "detailed strategy" because they really don't want to vote on the mission.
ISIS seems indeed to be sprouting carcinogenic tendrils throughout the Middle East and North Africa. Beyond the countries mentioned here, we have Nigeria, Chad, Niger, Sudan, Somalia and Kenya where the infection has already wreaked much damage and threatens a lot more.
As horrible as the Afghanistan war has been, it showed that denial of a national operation base for Al Qaeda led to the decimation of its capacity to function. By the same token, it's reasonable to place the highest priority on destroying ISIS in Syria and Iraq. Absent the territorial base of operation, the tendrils should have great trouble taking root and thriving like the noxious weeds that they are.
As horrible as the Afghanistan war has been, it showed that denial of a national operation base for Al Qaeda led to the decimation of its capacity to function. By the same token, it's reasonable to place the highest priority on destroying ISIS in Syria and Iraq. Absent the territorial base of operation, the tendrils should have great trouble taking root and thriving like the noxious weeds that they are.
3
Did you ever hear of a phyrric victory? Think.
4
Well, Einstein, in a way all victories are Pyrrhic; none are absolute and permanent. Ask the victors of Versailles. I'm guessing that you have given the issue a great deal of thought. I'd like to know what your thoughts are. After all, who gets lucky enough to learn from Einstein?
1
Perhaps you don't know that Einstein died in 1955?
1
Spending hundreds of billions of dollars to fight some 30,000 extremists who possess neither an air force nor a navy sounds very much like using a sledgehammer to swat a fly.
Yes, ISIS worries me. Drawing the US into another ground war that will inevitably strengthen the group which we purportedly intend to get rid of strikes me, in the absence of further evidence, as pure folly. This is not a part of the world where we have a demonstrated track record of military success and it is not a part of the world where we are especially loved. Maybe, just maybe, we are contemplating putting out a brushfire with gasoline.
Yes, ISIS worries me. Drawing the US into another ground war that will inevitably strengthen the group which we purportedly intend to get rid of strikes me, in the absence of further evidence, as pure folly. This is not a part of the world where we have a demonstrated track record of military success and it is not a part of the world where we are especially loved. Maybe, just maybe, we are contemplating putting out a brushfire with gasoline.
10
Thinking out of the box, it would be most interesting to get some expert opinions as to what the outcome would be if we simply backed out and let events take the course they are on. Would the Islamic nations (and perhaps Israel too) eventually all unite and their people revolt against ISIS rather than submit to their intolerable fates? Would be an interesting discussion for the Sunday morning talk shows. No politicians please. Only qualified, experienced foreign affair experts!
8
We can all acknowledge that the primary "cause" of the Obama presidency was income redistribution. But, followed close behind was that Obama would get us out of wars, and especially the war on terrorism. He would do this by publicly recognizing that American is fundamentally a bad actor, and Obama would change this. We would reintroduce diplomacy to the mix of tools and repair relationships with Russia, Iran, even North Korea.
Six years later, where are we? Yes, we have battled income disparity, only to make it worse. Yes, we have tried to repair our relationship with Russia. Clearly, that is not going so well. Even our relations with Germany has soured now that Merkel knows we secretly spy on her. How about the war on terror? Wow, the bad guys are now organizing across the world to actually represent a real threat.
At least we have better race relations..........ahhhh, not so much there either. Thus is truly working out to be a failed presidency.
Six years later, where are we? Yes, we have battled income disparity, only to make it worse. Yes, we have tried to repair our relationship with Russia. Clearly, that is not going so well. Even our relations with Germany has soured now that Merkel knows we secretly spy on her. How about the war on terror? Wow, the bad guys are now organizing across the world to actually represent a real threat.
At least we have better race relations..........ahhhh, not so much there either. Thus is truly working out to be a failed presidency.
12
Where are the weapons coming from? Who is profiting from the sales? A war can't grow without weaponry. The UN should find away to: 1) choke off the sale of arms in these regions and 2) invest in education and health care for families (e.g., exchanges so that the children can experience peace; women exchanges so that the women can be mentored by women who have been where they are and have found a way forward, young men so that they can find their identify and strengths in other ways) and begin the long process of building trust.
6
Very good question. Who is arming them? Who profits from all of this?
4
Why we have to jump into this fight but those countries that are directly be affect by the ISIS are stay out?????
16
Still no information on how the US will PAY FOR endless war in the Middle East , I see. Much less endless world wide war, as these writers are urging. Will these writers report on the FUNDING of these wars, or just continue ginning up terror and panic?
12
America lost this battle the moment we occupied Iraq. We are fighting an ideology that will rear its ugly head again and again in ever-more-violent forms. Short of genocide, there is no violent solution. Only the courage of Muslims to denounce this ideology will solve the problem.
Heck of a job, George W. Bush. This is your legacy.
Heck of a job, George W. Bush. This is your legacy.
26
I favor engagement in the following ways:
First, because Arabs were curiously unmoved when ISIS slaughtered Shias, Americans, Japanese, and Europeans, and because they defend Sharia and jihad (central ISIS values), I favor letting Arabs (who live there), and favor sending Arabs who live here (and support Sharia, Jihad, and therefore ISIS) to lead this engagement. Give them a gun and put them on a ship already.
Second, after Arabs have deployed all their resources (including the treasuries of Saudi Arabia and the UAE), I would encourage their acolytes living in sub-Saharan Africa (Boko Haram), South and Southeast Asia, and central Asian republics to head to Mosul post-haste, and take care of the problem. They have plenty of guns and ammo, they don't need our help.
Third, I would like to send all apologists living in the west - who talk about "moderate Muslims" to make a point - to mobilize and head out. They are getting on my nerves. If 25-30% of Muslims favor Jihad and Sharia, then essentially all do. Moderates may exist, but they are totally irrelevant. Less than 30% of Germans were Nazis; look at what they did.
In the fourth wave, which I suspect will be needed, I vote in favor of sending the children of the lawmakers who vote in favor of war, together with the children of defense contractors.
And then let's regroup and talk about emerging options at that time.
All those in favor, please say aye.
First, because Arabs were curiously unmoved when ISIS slaughtered Shias, Americans, Japanese, and Europeans, and because they defend Sharia and jihad (central ISIS values), I favor letting Arabs (who live there), and favor sending Arabs who live here (and support Sharia, Jihad, and therefore ISIS) to lead this engagement. Give them a gun and put them on a ship already.
Second, after Arabs have deployed all their resources (including the treasuries of Saudi Arabia and the UAE), I would encourage their acolytes living in sub-Saharan Africa (Boko Haram), South and Southeast Asia, and central Asian republics to head to Mosul post-haste, and take care of the problem. They have plenty of guns and ammo, they don't need our help.
Third, I would like to send all apologists living in the west - who talk about "moderate Muslims" to make a point - to mobilize and head out. They are getting on my nerves. If 25-30% of Muslims favor Jihad and Sharia, then essentially all do. Moderates may exist, but they are totally irrelevant. Less than 30% of Germans were Nazis; look at what they did.
In the fourth wave, which I suspect will be needed, I vote in favor of sending the children of the lawmakers who vote in favor of war, together with the children of defense contractors.
And then let's regroup and talk about emerging options at that time.
All those in favor, please say aye.
23
Time for international disarmament of the Middle East. Way past time.
3
The Republicans are fools not to pass a declaration of war, authorizing 'all necessary means to defeat and destroy ISIS." Either Obama pulls it off and the Republicans can claim credit for giving him the authority to do it, or Obama doesn't pull it off and the Republicans can blame him and Democrats generally for being incompetent.
1
Obama can neither pull it off or fail. This is a task for the next three presidencies.
3
I might as well have begged your writer, Tim Arango, to explore more about this in 2010. To no avail. His hands were tied. I lived 30 miles from the Syrian border, as well as 20 other places in Iraq. It was hard to get a response from anyone in the press then.
Now look at it. I believe we are tired of war, but this too will pass. These people are like Hitler's SS. When they have the uniform on, they are next to no man; when stripped of it, they flee like little birds frightened of their own shadow. I watched them operate in the shadows in TalAfar, Mosul, Kirkuk, Baghad, Al Kut, and even south in UmQasar.
They are phony pathetic pieces of lost humanity, who will soon disappear for the face of the earth. Anything we can do do to speed it up would be welcome to me.
I'm so tired of the killing in Iraq I could spit.
Now look at it. I believe we are tired of war, but this too will pass. These people are like Hitler's SS. When they have the uniform on, they are next to no man; when stripped of it, they flee like little birds frightened of their own shadow. I watched them operate in the shadows in TalAfar, Mosul, Kirkuk, Baghad, Al Kut, and even south in UmQasar.
They are phony pathetic pieces of lost humanity, who will soon disappear for the face of the earth. Anything we can do do to speed it up would be welcome to me.
I'm so tired of the killing in Iraq I could spit.
10
In the years through most of the 20th century, the US was fighting the idels and idea of Communism , which was little differednt from ISIS, and other daish. We once allied ourselves with Stalin to fight two larger and more immediate dangers in the form of Germany and , to a far lesser extent, Japan. After the War poswter appeared on buses in the US which read "Stand Up and Be COunted in the FIght against Communism". It became our secular religion. Maybe we ought to adopt many of the methods used then in fighting the mindless zeal of Communist thought which spouted as much nonsense and prayed to it's own secular gods, Marx and Engels. Islamic Assassin types aided us in the last years of this fight, and convinced themselves that the USA was just another USSR.
We ought to return the favor, and treat all of Islam not our sworn allies as our deadliest enemies, prepare for a new "cold" or "like-warm war" against these daish's mindless religious jingoism.
It may take 5 or 6 generations but because Islam cannot construct any of the tools a modern movement or society needs, it will , like the USSR before it, eventually fail. The numerous Anarchists and Socialists so threatening in the 19th century, also either left their movements after 1919, or joined with the new "utopia", the USSR, until most of them died disillusioned by the barbarism and phony rhetoric of the Soviets.
This may just be part of the historical cycle that we'd best get used to.
We ought to return the favor, and treat all of Islam not our sworn allies as our deadliest enemies, prepare for a new "cold" or "like-warm war" against these daish's mindless religious jingoism.
It may take 5 or 6 generations but because Islam cannot construct any of the tools a modern movement or society needs, it will , like the USSR before it, eventually fail. The numerous Anarchists and Socialists so threatening in the 19th century, also either left their movements after 1919, or joined with the new "utopia", the USSR, until most of them died disillusioned by the barbarism and phony rhetoric of the Soviets.
This may just be part of the historical cycle that we'd best get used to.
2
A 19th century socialist wrote the American pledge of allegiance. FYI. Socialists all got the five day week. Etc.
3
We need to be supporting the Assads of the region. Cannot be worse than what exists now.
8
The US should arm Assad. I hold the west responsible for the death toll in Syria. If the west had not destabilised Syria, 200,000 would not be dead and 2 million displaced. Assad cruelly suppressed any dissent but his death toll was likely less than 10 a year killed and hundreds or perhaps thousands imprisoned. The west unleashed the Saudi, Kuwaiti and Turkey islamists sponsored Sunni supremacissts.
5
Scary. Where, oh where is our foreign policy?
6
A "foreign policy" cannot fire a weapon, in offense or defense. "Policies" are generally ignored, except by those who benefit from them.
2
ISIS's continuing spread is not a foregone conclusion for lots of reasons. But what has contributed to its success to date has been complacency of the "They won't/can't get much farther" sort. The US has to fundamentally decide whether it wants to eliminate ISIS or not. If the former, it has to go all in (we see the mixed results of the equivocal measures to date). If the latter, fine, then be done with this half-hearted Degrade/Destroy Limited Action And No Boots on the Ground Because This Isn't W's Iraq War Again Nosiree or whatever this muddled thing is that we're doing. The argument that our friendly - or at least non-hostile - Arab partners are going to take any action of significance against ISIS on their own is silly. Generally, most Arab governments (with some good reason) see the US as a fair weather friend and a puppeteer, wanting to put an Arab face on US dirty work. Most Arab people, to the extent they have a decided opinion of the US at all, view the US as a generally anti-Muslim country (also with some good reason) which (also) just wants the Arabs to do the US dirty work. Given the choice between opining on who is the greater enemy to Arabs, ISIS or the US, most of our Arab friends would say the US. Let's stop kidding ourselves, make a big boy decision, and get on with it.
2
I can't see, with the perspective of history, how Isis is little more than a passing nuisance. If the west determines that Isis is a manifestation of some kind of resurgence virulent islam of the 15th century with 21st military capabilities, then it should go all in to liquidate it.
This nonsense is more likely to be the former, to be manipulated by politicians and their corporate masters to drag on indefinitely to great profit- and misery for all else. I
In the latter case, modern war is total war & has no non- combatants - see,e.g., 9/11 and the present wars of the ME where the sunnis are completely complicit in Isis'mischief, including the Anbar tribes and the Saudis- the west has the means to eradicate a serious muslim threat in an instanrt and should do so and be done with it.
This nonsense is more likely to be the former, to be manipulated by politicians and their corporate masters to drag on indefinitely to great profit- and misery for all else. I
In the latter case, modern war is total war & has no non- combatants - see,e.g., 9/11 and the present wars of the ME where the sunnis are completely complicit in Isis'mischief, including the Anbar tribes and the Saudis- the west has the means to eradicate a serious muslim threat in an instanrt and should do so and be done with it.
4
The people that are expressing your view point might be missing the reasons the degrade and distroy strategy was originally laid out. The iraqi army needed to be trained and strengthened to take on the task. The western "crusaders" cannot be seen "occupying" the middle east anymore, since this gives ammunition to the extremists. Just as importantly Iraq needed to be inclusive to all its ethnic groups in its government and military. For the US to just support the shia and bail them out is of no benefit to anyone in the long run. Whether the situation has escalated where the US needs to be more heavily involved now can be debated but this is different than saying the US did not have any strategy initially.
1
The escalation of Islamist terror groups can be laid directly at the feet of the United States. It started with the invasion of Iraq with no solid plan for the aftermath leaving a power vacuum and nature abhors a vacuum. The bringing down of Gaddafi with no plan once again left a power vacuum and the extremists moved in in both cases. And who brought this about? The war criminals Cheney and Bush and the neocons.
41
True. Bush/Cheney are war criminals whose lack of perspective and ignorance concerning the ME have initiated this mischief. But that is irrelevant now if indeed the islamic groups are a serious threat to western civiluzation. In that case (and I do not consider Isis to be anything but a nuisance which would be oblitersted by a capable armored division as fast as one could fuel the tanks) the west has the means to finish the threat immediately and should do so..
If the US decides to engage.in total war, the draft should be reinstated and a war tax imposed. . We should also expect and accept civilian casualties. Any other measure and attitude is just unserious.
If the US decides to engage.in total war, the draft should be reinstated and a war tax imposed. . We should also expect and accept civilian casualties. Any other measure and attitude is just unserious.
2
I don't think the purpose of Bush and Cheney was to leave a power vacuum. They thought the Democratic inclined rebels would be able to form a government.
The government keeps saying that this is not a war of civilizations. It is not the West against Islam. But what is it, really?
It may not be a war of civilizations, but it is certainly a war against civilization. We focus our military might against this foe, but is that the correct weapon in a war against civilization? The primary job of the military is to capture and hold territory. ISIS can be anywhere. How can holding any specific territory stop ISIS? It can't.
The only way to successfully prosecute a war against civilization is if all civilizations become civilized. That is, all peoples must band together and destroy this barbarous menace as it festers in their own back yards. Only the Islamic people can stop it by refusing to join it and support it.
The President wants an open ended military authorization which is really an open ended police action that uses the military as its club. Probably won't work. Slow them down, yes. Eradicate? No.
ISIS thrives because it knows we will not launch a total war against it. If we killed everyone in every area they operated within, we could get rid of them. Unfortunately, a few hundred million innocents would die also. Their barbarism thrives under our respect for life.
ISIS was born out of a corruption of Islam and only the people of Islam can remove it. Until then, better expect a never ending series of military authorizations.
It may not be a war of civilizations, but it is certainly a war against civilization. We focus our military might against this foe, but is that the correct weapon in a war against civilization? The primary job of the military is to capture and hold territory. ISIS can be anywhere. How can holding any specific territory stop ISIS? It can't.
The only way to successfully prosecute a war against civilization is if all civilizations become civilized. That is, all peoples must band together and destroy this barbarous menace as it festers in their own back yards. Only the Islamic people can stop it by refusing to join it and support it.
The President wants an open ended military authorization which is really an open ended police action that uses the military as its club. Probably won't work. Slow them down, yes. Eradicate? No.
ISIS thrives because it knows we will not launch a total war against it. If we killed everyone in every area they operated within, we could get rid of them. Unfortunately, a few hundred million innocents would die also. Their barbarism thrives under our respect for life.
ISIS was born out of a corruption of Islam and only the people of Islam can remove it. Until then, better expect a never ending series of military authorizations.
11
The US cannot fight a global war on its own - its as simple as that. And, we need more than token support from others if all this about ISIS is true. Better that we secure our borders and let others with a vested interest in keeping their power in the Arab World and in Europe fight it out, with some strategic help from us.
Frankly, without social security and medicare, there are going to be a lot of expats from the US. The amount of expats is increasing every day. I personally would rather live here, but its time for the rich and corporations to pony up the cash if they want to maintain their wealth in a world where terrorists are wrecking havoc in North Africa and the Mideast. Because, without improving the security of seniors, the disabled and the middle class, there will be a resentful feeling at home during what could be a third world war. If peoples' lives have no financial security, then they are going to have a hard time supporting a war for the people who caused that lack of security.
The rich and corporations are going to have to realize that its impossible to stay rich if there is no consumer middle class; and no other country seems to have to fight the entire muslim world to survive except the US. Is this all for real?
Frankly, without social security and medicare, there are going to be a lot of expats from the US. The amount of expats is increasing every day. I personally would rather live here, but its time for the rich and corporations to pony up the cash if they want to maintain their wealth in a world where terrorists are wrecking havoc in North Africa and the Mideast. Because, without improving the security of seniors, the disabled and the middle class, there will be a resentful feeling at home during what could be a third world war. If peoples' lives have no financial security, then they are going to have a hard time supporting a war for the people who caused that lack of security.
The rich and corporations are going to have to realize that its impossible to stay rich if there is no consumer middle class; and no other country seems to have to fight the entire muslim world to survive except the US. Is this all for real?
17
The Administration and their Neocon masters clearly plan to liquidate SS and Medicare to pay for the next decade of war.
The problem of ISIS is a problem of a power vacuum that has existed in a vast territory since 1918 when the Ottoman Empire collapsed. The Empire held together Sunnis and Shiites under one umbrella for centuries. However the 20th century brought oil cash to fund clandestine wars of terror between the Sunni Oil States (namely OPEC) and Shiite states (like Iran). If you look at a map you can see that Iraq straddles Saudi Arabia and Iran. The strongman regime of Saddam Hussein acted as a buffer between these two two warring religious camps. When the US blew out Sadam, we left a power vacuum... and they are trying with illicit, state sponsored terrorism to gain advantage over each other.
So what then is the solution? We might be better to ask where is the money coming from to bankroll ISIS. Find the money source and kill it off - and suddenly all these "movements" and "Caliphates" and propaganda, guns, and supplies will vanish.
You can't wage insurrection without money. Trace it to the source, and literally kill the sponsors.
Putting "troops on the ground" simply draws the US into as a third party into this mess. Why not kill the money flow and save our boy's lives as a first option? I don't see the US Treasury chasing Saudi private citizens for funding this crap. Let's take off the gloves: find sponsors of terrorism and KILL them, not their dumb proteges out in the fields.
So what then is the solution? We might be better to ask where is the money coming from to bankroll ISIS. Find the money source and kill it off - and suddenly all these "movements" and "Caliphates" and propaganda, guns, and supplies will vanish.
You can't wage insurrection without money. Trace it to the source, and literally kill the sponsors.
Putting "troops on the ground" simply draws the US into as a third party into this mess. Why not kill the money flow and save our boy's lives as a first option? I don't see the US Treasury chasing Saudi private citizens for funding this crap. Let's take off the gloves: find sponsors of terrorism and KILL them, not their dumb proteges out in the fields.
23
TEDM pretty much hits the nail on the head: Cut off the funding by destroying the funders. Just killing the fighters won't put an end to it because money will bring them back to life with a new crop of recruits. But without money they will eventually die. And we can't be fearful of where the money trail leads.
7
I agree. Instead of wasting resources tracking its citizens, the security apparatus can easily determine the source of the terrorists' money. Find and kill them. No troops, advisors, money, arms, or mercenaries. Choke off the money, the insurgency withers.
This will mot happen as there is too much profit for the financial "elites" who have no nationality and are aligned with their comrades in interests in the ME.
This will mot happen as there is too much profit for the financial "elites" who have no nationality and are aligned with their comrades in interests in the ME.
2
We have to keep in mind that the near-term objective of ISIS is to provoke us so as to engage our military (on the ground). With vengeance on their minds, they want very much to engage and kill American troops. For us to commit to that is a trap because this is a war with no end. Containment appears to be the best approach by surrounding their base in Iraq and Syria with OUR allies, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, UAE, Qatar, Isreal and, most importantly, the Kurds. Unfortunately, the Turks and Iraqis are big problems.
50
Oh so wrong, Craig. We can end this horror and end the never ending war at the same time. We need to kill at least 10K of them in the next few weeks before they think they can own the rest of the world.
It is time for the nay-Sayers to stand aside and let the experts do the job we all know is needed. It will mean release from the cycle of violence I saw brewing in Iraq not so long ago. It will not be entrapment.
It is time for the nay-Sayers to stand aside and let the experts do the job we all know is needed. It will mean release from the cycle of violence I saw brewing in Iraq not so long ago. It will not be entrapment.
1
ISIS has to be defeated by killing them. So what if they "provoke us" into war, the matter of fact is that they already have. We just refuse to wage a real war on them. Since ISIS includes all of their society, men, woman and children, we need to defeat all. It is not much different from what it took to win the Indian Wars in the Western USA. In fact the American Indian war ethic would be much more effective against ISIS than the warped version of how to wage war being ordered by our commander in chief.
1
Craig, with Allies like Saudi Arabia, Jordan, UAE, Qatar, Israel and Turkey, who needs friends.
The majority of Intellectual funding of all so called Islamic Terror comes from the Saudi Ideology and extremist interpretation of Islam by Abdul Wahab (b. 1703- d. 1793 in Nejd, Arabia). It is the same interpretation that is the MO of Taliban (we created with Saudi-Pakistan assistance), Al-Qaeda, Al-Nusrah, IS, Aqap, Boko Haram, JI, ASWJ and TTP to name a few. The main funding source have been Saudi Arabia, UAE and Qatar with Logistical support from Turkey Jordan, and Qatar.
The presence of ISIS is known to be at the border of Israel in Golan - ISIS has not fired a shot towards Israel ever and Israel, our so called closest ally in the area has not done anything to help us get rid of this evil and has not fired a single shot to harm ISIS, in contrast they have killed a senior Iranian General who was helping us on the ground against ISIS.
Turkey has not even allowed us to use our airbase near the border od Syria to fight ISIS.
As I said with friends like these who needs enemies?
The majority of Intellectual funding of all so called Islamic Terror comes from the Saudi Ideology and extremist interpretation of Islam by Abdul Wahab (b. 1703- d. 1793 in Nejd, Arabia). It is the same interpretation that is the MO of Taliban (we created with Saudi-Pakistan assistance), Al-Qaeda, Al-Nusrah, IS, Aqap, Boko Haram, JI, ASWJ and TTP to name a few. The main funding source have been Saudi Arabia, UAE and Qatar with Logistical support from Turkey Jordan, and Qatar.
The presence of ISIS is known to be at the border of Israel in Golan - ISIS has not fired a shot towards Israel ever and Israel, our so called closest ally in the area has not done anything to help us get rid of this evil and has not fired a single shot to harm ISIS, in contrast they have killed a senior Iranian General who was helping us on the ground against ISIS.
Turkey has not even allowed us to use our airbase near the border od Syria to fight ISIS.
As I said with friends like these who needs enemies?
1
Hate to be cynical.
But ISIS looks like more mascots for endless military spending.
If we didn't even bother to investigate the largest mass murder in the history of the US, the collapses of WTC 1, 2, and 7, to determine who dropped the buildings in controlled demolitions, as Larry Silverstein admitted he had directed for WTC 7..........why wouldn't we expect that ISIS is another slick publicity stunt for war spending?
So send all your money now, to:
IRS
PO Box: The Fund For Perpetual War
Washington, DC, 200000000000000000000
The zip or national debt......who knows.
But ISIS looks like more mascots for endless military spending.
If we didn't even bother to investigate the largest mass murder in the history of the US, the collapses of WTC 1, 2, and 7, to determine who dropped the buildings in controlled demolitions, as Larry Silverstein admitted he had directed for WTC 7..........why wouldn't we expect that ISIS is another slick publicity stunt for war spending?
So send all your money now, to:
IRS
PO Box: The Fund For Perpetual War
Washington, DC, 200000000000000000000
The zip or national debt......who knows.
9
It becomes obvious that, if the Arab states will not act and moderate Muslims cannot prevail, then drastic measures that will hurt a wide range of people must be taken to end this scourge.
8
The world must condemn sunni supremacists and attack it roots in Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Kuwait. They are all secret US haters. The Iranians at least are honest in saying their hate. These "friends" just don't say the DTA slogan.
2
How is this news? In the years before and after 9/11/01, Osama Bin Laden said that the US could kill him but that a "thousand other bin Ladens" would arise to take his place." so what makes the possibility of eternal war in the Arab Crescent and other areas? This has been going on long since before the 70's. It is the US which, in the guise of Bush's ill advised personal religious crusading,("God Wants me to be President."), that took out both Afghanistan and then, had us walk, or run away from the unfinished new nation we were failing to reconstruct, as we had sworn to do, and took our measly few troops into Iraq on the falsified assumptions of old Cold Warriors then at loose ends .
This might have made sense as a headline 15 years ago. Now this article is just "flogging a dead horse".
The only issue for discussion anymore is what is the West is ultimately going to do about the ever faster spiral of the Islamic world back into barbarism, flat earth style ignorance and self impoverishment in the name of religion.
This might have made sense as a headline 15 years ago. Now this article is just "flogging a dead horse".
The only issue for discussion anymore is what is the West is ultimately going to do about the ever faster spiral of the Islamic world back into barbarism, flat earth style ignorance and self impoverishment in the name of religion.
2
Now that the world's attention is focused on the "Islamic State":
The United States can begin by showing the world that we can police ourselves—by holding those responsible for the war-crimes-humanitarian debacle known as the Iraq War ACCOUNTABLE.
[Instead, they sit comfortably in retirement or still in their academic or business positions.]
The United States can begin by showing the world that we can police ourselves—by holding those responsible for the war-crimes-humanitarian debacle known as the Iraq War ACCOUNTABLE.
[Instead, they sit comfortably in retirement or still in their academic or business positions.]
16
Bush/Cheney, Blair and the neocons created this monster called ISIS which is sprouting tentacles throughout the region and further beyond. The 21st century has seen nothing but war and an enormous loss of civilian life.
Bush and company fought an illegal war, left a power vacuum and had no exit strategy. It isn't just the Americans who are war weary, we Brits are too but what to do about ISIS.
Your friends in the Gulf fund ISIS on one hand and contribute to the bombing campaign on the other. This has nothing to do with sectarianism but the filling of a power vacuum, extreme and evil violence reminiscent of the crusades and the Middle Ages. Today I saw cages where 17 Peshmerga fighters just the like the Jordanian pilot we're going to be immolated.
I don't have the answer but I know who are responsible for this insanity.
Bush and company fought an illegal war, left a power vacuum and had no exit strategy. It isn't just the Americans who are war weary, we Brits are too but what to do about ISIS.
Your friends in the Gulf fund ISIS on one hand and contribute to the bombing campaign on the other. This has nothing to do with sectarianism but the filling of a power vacuum, extreme and evil violence reminiscent of the crusades and the Middle Ages. Today I saw cages where 17 Peshmerga fighters just the like the Jordanian pilot we're going to be immolated.
I don't have the answer but I know who are responsible for this insanity.
13
We were warned by Eisenhower, but we failed to listen. Logic cannot compete with the satisfaction of killing.
13
Why didn't the Bush administration listen to the experts who vociferously warned it of this EXACT outcome?
16
Why didn't the Obama regime listen when it was warned of exactly this outcome when Obama recklessly and irresponsibly pulled troops out of Iraq too soon just to score a few cheap political points?
4
The deal cut didn't allow for troops. Read up. This is a famously false libel.
5
"Islamic State Sprouting Limbs Beyond Its Base"
yet, a very large majority of the violence will continue to be inflicted at the base. syria has lost about 190,000 people since 2011. iraq has lost 500,000 or more since 2003. countless refugees exist from both areas.
islamic radicals overwhelmingly harm muslims. and in my opinion, muslims, not westerners, need to confront islamic radicals. a black sheep of the family needs to be addressed by the family.
yet, a very large majority of the violence will continue to be inflicted at the base. syria has lost about 190,000 people since 2011. iraq has lost 500,000 or more since 2003. countless refugees exist from both areas.
islamic radicals overwhelmingly harm muslims. and in my opinion, muslims, not westerners, need to confront islamic radicals. a black sheep of the family needs to be addressed by the family.
10
So many commentators seemingly leaving Israel out of the equation(!) So, if/when ISIS gets to Israel do you really want to see nukes come out of Israel's closet?? The point being that there are so many scenarios involving them In the longer term, their military has to be a major factor to be considered. Wondering why everyone doesn't see the obvious power confrontation that would be set up, potentially between IS and Israel...
How many years has it been now since George W. Bush told us that this would never end? This cycle of violence will never break.
1
You are all missing the primary strategy/plot that was driving the foreign policy prior to the Obama "dreams from my father" administration took hold and reversed course. First of all blaming Bush is ridiculous since congress and the majority of America approved the invasion and bringing sadam to justice. The democrates being politicians doing what they do best politicize issues to bring division like critiquing the War especially before the surge strategy was enacted and succeeded. Since we had a foothold in afganistan which shares the entire eastern border of Iran which also means that the US had an enormous military presence not far from a bad guy whose country also Bordered the western border of what country? You guessed it Iran... Now who can tell me what country that is run by muslim Imans is about to have weaponized uranium? You guessed Iran. Now who is disparatly trying to get a nuclear arms deal done by writing secret letters to Ayatollah Khomeini? Who's thinks its gonna work with any geopolitcal military leverage knocking on the door of Iran?
2
Bush/Cheney started it ALL. They deceived the American public.
5
Who died and left us in charge of policing the entire globe?
Isn't this largely an Arab/Islamic problem?
Haven't we already sacrificed enough young men and women in this senseless endeavor?
Isn't this largely an Arab/Islamic problem?
Haven't we already sacrificed enough young men and women in this senseless endeavor?
13
Follow them wherever they go and destroy them. Simple.
It appears like these "Isis" lunatics are getting funded from other countries, whether it's Saudi Arabia or maybe even China or Russia, just for the purpose to drain us financially. I mean why aren't they helping? Even though it is really not affecting them, that alone makes them suspect.
Let's get to the root of the problem and attack the country or countries really funding them behind the scene.
Let's get to the root of the problem and attack the country or countries really funding them behind the scene.
5
The genie is out of the bottle, and as we know it's very difficult to get the genie back in. It will take a full-tilt-boogie effort to defeat ISIS, if indeed they can be defeated. So far, few of the players who should be most engaged in this effort seem reluctant to do what it will take. If that continues there really will be a so-called " Islamic Caliphate " established in the Middle East. Can we learn to live with that? We may have to.
You are all missing the primary strategy/plot that was driving the foreign policy prior to the Obama "dreams from my father" administration took hold and reversed course. First of all blaming Bush is ridiculous since congress and the majority of America approved the invasion and bringing sadam to justice. The democrates being politicians doing what they do best politicize issues to bring division like critiquing the War especially before the surge strategy was enacted and succeeded. Since we had a foothold in afganistan which shares the entire eastern border of Iran which also means that the US had an enormous military presence not far from a bad guy whose country also Bordered the western border of what country? You guessed it Iran... Now who can tell me what country that is run by muslim Imans is about to have weaponized uranium? You guessed Iran. Now who is disparatly trying to get a nuclear arms deal done by writing secret letters to Ayatollah Khomeini? Who's thinks its gonna work with any geopolitcal military leverage knocking on the door of Iran?
2
How can this raise the prospect of a new global war on terror"?
First, our govt has ended the wars. Do you imply we need to restart them?
Second, ISIS has been taught that it acts with impunity. There have been no repurcussions for beheadings and other atrocities. Therefore, how can we now say we are "concerned" about ISIS growth.
Ye reap what ye sow.
First, our govt has ended the wars. Do you imply we need to restart them?
Second, ISIS has been taught that it acts with impunity. There have been no repurcussions for beheadings and other atrocities. Therefore, how can we now say we are "concerned" about ISIS growth.
Ye reap what ye sow.
This latest piece of news is not unexpected. The Islamic State has been so successful on total terrorism that local chapters are sprouting up all over the muslim world. ISIL became the MacDonalds of terrorism. Attack drones and special forces will experience exponential growth in the next few years.
W. said something surprisingly intelligent about America post 9/11. The war against muslim terrorism - a modern crusade -- will be fought for years and decades to come. An asymmetrical warfare against a non state shape shifting enemy without a country and without a face.
Meanwhile Washington policy makers - living in the past - still insist in regime change in the muslim world to get rid of 'bad' dictators such as deposed Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi and Assad that refuses to come down.
W. said something surprisingly intelligent about America post 9/11. The war against muslim terrorism - a modern crusade -- will be fought for years and decades to come. An asymmetrical warfare against a non state shape shifting enemy without a country and without a face.
Meanwhile Washington policy makers - living in the past - still insist in regime change in the muslim world to get rid of 'bad' dictators such as deposed Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi and Assad that refuses to come down.
2
White House press secretary, Earnest, asserts that the US doesn't want ISIL to think it is safe for them to move to another country and be out of the reach of US capability. That statement is the most troubling part of this piece. It suggests the the policy of the Obama Administration will be to pursue ISIL in multiple locations beyond our present engagement. The danger is not one or two entanglements, but many and simultaneously as well. Is it too much to ask that countries infected by the ISIL defend themselves and do so aggressively and early rather than waiting for the US to intervene? Long-lasting harm on the vitality and spirit of our nation, continuously at war, is what we will have to show for hop=scotching around the globe in pursuit of newly sprouting terror groups.
7
Islamic State is one head of a hydra monster whose soul is radical Islam. They follow the same religion and have similar policies to Boko Haram, Nusra Front, Al Qaeda, Taliban, Al-Shabaab, and the animals who killed 300 school children in Russia during the Beslan School Massacre and those who killed 200 children in Pakistan. There are numerous other smaller Islamic radical groups causing trouble around the world. Meanwhile, Iran is dragging out the negotiations while working frantically underground to complete their bomb.
This is a more difficult problem than dealing with Nazi Germany. The world knew if they could stop one country -- Germany -- and take out one man -- Hitler -- the Nazi threat would be ended. With radical Islam there is no single country or leader we can eliminate to end the madness. We are dealing with an evil ideology that Westerners cannot understand.
This is a more difficult problem than dealing with Nazi Germany. The world knew if they could stop one country -- Germany -- and take out one man -- Hitler -- the Nazi threat would be ended. With radical Islam there is no single country or leader we can eliminate to end the madness. We are dealing with an evil ideology that Westerners cannot understand.
6
We have our own radical warmongers Bush/Cheney.
There is no end to their madness. Now Jeb is running for President.
There is no end to their madness. Now Jeb is running for President.
3
The cancer that is ISIS/ISIL will continue to metastasize until the whole of the Middle East (ME) politic finally decides that it is, in fact, a cancer bent on destroying who they are and what they have. To this point those in the ME appear to act as though efforts to physically destroy ISIS is somehow killing their countrymen or that this cancer won't really get them, a weakness that ISIS takes full advantage of. But cancers are indiscriminate in their killing, as the world has and continues to see. But like cancers of the body, they continue their destruction until the mind decides to fight it and fight it hard in a way that justifies the pain and loss that comes with any such fight. The "mind" of the ME must come to this understanding and acceptance before any true degradation can occur.
The U.S. needs to focus much more attention and pressure on to the collective ME "mind" and get them to see how this cancer will eventually kill them, not just in parts, but in the whole. That should be our focus and that is how we should use our power.
The U.S. needs to focus much more attention and pressure on to the collective ME "mind" and get them to see how this cancer will eventually kill them, not just in parts, but in the whole. That should be our focus and that is how we should use our power.
1
You assume that they do not want death. Do not assume that other people have the same values that you have. Including valuing life.
3
This war has been ongoing since the death of the Prophet. American leaders failed to understand that and, in order to ensure gas for its planes and tanks, made itself responsible for some of that war. (Remember how the last big Nazi push in the Battle of the Bulge ended when they ran out of gas?) In turn we supported or paid the Shah, the Ayatollahs, and Saddam. The Sheikhs of Arabia were always our “friends.” Seeing our weather-vane policy, why should anyone trust us now?
Momentum is hard to change in a politico-war machine like America. Unless all hands rally to the cause, Americans will continue to die in desert sands for at least half a century. All parties need to help Obama to get us out of there. Let the natives fight themselves to a standstill, or we will continue on the road to being a third-world country ruled by our own hyper-wealthy sheikhs.
Momentum is hard to change in a politico-war machine like America. Unless all hands rally to the cause, Americans will continue to die in desert sands for at least half a century. All parties need to help Obama to get us out of there. Let the natives fight themselves to a standstill, or we will continue on the road to being a third-world country ruled by our own hyper-wealthy sheikhs.
10
Was the Ottoman Empire which included parts of Europe, Africa, the Mideast and South Asia a caliphate. It was destroyed in WW 1 and it's lands colonized by European victors....Seems like ISIL is trying to recapture that....that is recent history.
This is the legacy of George W. Bush, courtesy of the GOP base.
And everyone knows it.
And everyone knows it.
24
Barack Obama is the father of ISIS. Obama created ISIS when he pulled troops out of Iraq too soon for cheap political points. All his advisers, generals, and the GOP warned Obama of the consequences but Obama really believes he's the smartest human ever. History has proven Obama was wrong about Iraq and Romney was right!
6
As if a general conflagration across the Mideast, and Crimea and Ukraine, and central Africa from the Atlantic to the Indian Ocean, could ever be accomplished by any one American president. Try some proportionality. The European terror network of the 1970s and 1980s was as ruthless as ISIS, btw. Whom to blame?
Lord bless you wit, Larry. Read my comment above. This is an old war. All that's new is the title--unless you include "caliphate," a very old word--remember all those Sinbad and Ali Baba movies?
2
As has been pointed out by many the Turks have 500,000 troops and 3000 tanks and could take ISIS out rapidly......instead they are sitting back while we pour more billions into that mess. How stupid are our policy makers? If ISIS is so bad why is Turkey, a member of NATO, doing essentially nothing....let alone Saudi Arabia and others? If we are worried about womens rights why not give a green card to every female in the areas under domination by ISIS? While we are at it why not give green cards to all women under Muslim domination and give them the option of getting out. All of a sudden they will be worth a lot.
12
So what happened to the 'Khorason Group', the baddest of the bad/more evil and savage than even ISIS? They were the other supposed terrorist threat to The Homeland which sprouted up that U.S. 'Intelligence' never saw coming - just like ISIS.
Maybe if we just wait a little bit, ISIS will mysteriously vanish just like the Khorasan Group.
Maybe if we just wait a little bit, ISIS will mysteriously vanish just like the Khorasan Group.
7
George W. Bush -- and his neocon friends -- caused this problem by taking out a reliable secular dictator named Saddam -- one whose human rights record was arguably better than our friend's in Saudi Arabia. Iraq War Dos was the worst foreign policy blunder in well over 100 years by the United States. (Also, Putin was probably right about Syria.)
It's just difficult to put into words how poorly the United States "does" foreign policy. World, please stop listening!
It's just difficult to put into words how poorly the United States "does" foreign policy. World, please stop listening!
29
Sorry, Anthony, "blame" is not a foreign policy.
Yes,
And now that the world's attention is focused on the "Islamic State":
The United States can begin by showing the world that we can police ourselves—by holding those responsible for the war-crimes-humanitarian debacle known as the Iraq War ACCOUNTABLE.
[Instead, they sit comfortably in retirement or still in their academic or business positions.]
And now that the world's attention is focused on the "Islamic State":
The United States can begin by showing the world that we can police ourselves—by holding those responsible for the war-crimes-humanitarian debacle known as the Iraq War ACCOUNTABLE.
[Instead, they sit comfortably in retirement or still in their academic or business positions.]
8
Yes, and here we go again: Global War on Terror.
This harkens back to George W. Bush's smug and idiotic pronouncements of "Axis of Evil" and "You're either with us or against us"—and yes, a WAR (un-ending, now)—instead of dealing with a criminal act called 9/11 and bringing the perpetrators to justice.
This harkens back to George W. Bush's smug and idiotic pronouncements of "Axis of Evil" and "You're either with us or against us"—and yes, a WAR (un-ending, now)—instead of dealing with a criminal act called 9/11 and bringing the perpetrators to justice.
14
First thing we have to do is pass DHS budget. Second thing we should do is get out of middle east and do business whoever in power. The ISIL/ISIS fight belong to Islamic states. Let them fight it out.
8
Unfortunately it was America's illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq that created El Qiada in Iraq which eventually morphed into ISIS. We have a responsibility to clean this up. It would be nice if the middle eastern countries would clean this up, however they lack the solidarity required. If they did they could easily deal with ISIS. If America made the painful political decision to get out of the middle east it just might spur these countries to form a true "coalition of the willing" and deal with ISIS.
1
January 3, 2014: ISIS takes over Fallujah
January 7, 2014: President Obama in an interview with David Remnick refers to ISIS as a 'JV' team
September 7, 2014: President Obama backpedals on his 'JV' remark in a Meet the Press interview
2014: various horrendous murders are committed by ISIS including beheadings & setting people afire
February 14, 2014: NYTimes reports that the 'JV' team is expanding into multiple countries
February 14, 2014: The big question ... How does our Commander in Chief get it so wrong a mere 13 months ago? Bad intel? Insular inner group of advisors? Wrong headed thinking re. how to wipe out ISIS? If the United States does not provide the leadership required to defeat these barbarians, then who will?
January 7, 2014: President Obama in an interview with David Remnick refers to ISIS as a 'JV' team
September 7, 2014: President Obama backpedals on his 'JV' remark in a Meet the Press interview
2014: various horrendous murders are committed by ISIS including beheadings & setting people afire
February 14, 2014: NYTimes reports that the 'JV' team is expanding into multiple countries
February 14, 2014: The big question ... How does our Commander in Chief get it so wrong a mere 13 months ago? Bad intel? Insular inner group of advisors? Wrong headed thinking re. how to wipe out ISIS? If the United States does not provide the leadership required to defeat these barbarians, then who will?
14
The Saudis. It's their family feud, not ours.
23
Everything the US has done in the ME in the last 62 years has made it more radical, increased the slaughter. Since deposing Mossadecq in Iran to arming what became the Taliban to arming Saddam Hussein, to The Charge of The Fools Brigade into Iraq.
Six decades, trillions of dollars, 10,000 dead GI's, hundreds of thousands dead Iranians, Iraqi's Afghan's.
For NOTHING.
Six decades, trillions of dollars, 10,000 dead GI's, hundreds of thousands dead Iranians, Iraqi's Afghan's.
For NOTHING.
20
Or Iran.
2
In April 2013 the Kurds requested, in writing, that Obama authorize defensive weapons for them. (By then several "bright red lines" had been crossed.) ISIS was just gaining strength then. Four months later the Kurds received.... MREs and body armor. On Friday the Kurd's spokesman was a national news show, asking once again for anti-armor weapons and heavier guns. We're a day late and a dollar short, while ISIS metastasizes. Just look at Yemen.
8
Stop trying to goad our President into war.
7
It reads as if Charles might be trying to goad? The president into arming Kurds as a counter to Daesh. Which Kurds and which weapons and which terms are u known, but it would seem to be a way to stay out of combat, as opposed to bombing, however reluctantly.
3
Not much "goading required." He campaigned on war, and said "Afghanistan is the right war," and that he would close Gitmo. Under Obama we began new military commands in Central Africa, and even Australia. He's the king of drone strikes, unbidden.
4
Once again I raise the question, why haven't the Arab Nations issued orders to their vast and well trained armies to close ranks and engage the ISIS killers?.
The horror that will be reigned down on the Arab countries if ISIS takes over
will be the most barbaric in history!.
They are on the front lines of this war, so WHAT ARE THEY WAITING FOR?!!
The horror that will be reigned down on the Arab countries if ISIS takes over
will be the most barbaric in history!.
They are on the front lines of this war, so WHAT ARE THEY WAITING FOR?!!
14
Us, or US. Either way, we lose.
6
They are not your allies. When will you wake up from that dream?
6
The Saud tribe, for that is what they are, are the only people I know of who have a country named after them--courtesy of oil. The tribe is very large, so that key positions in business and government (same thing) are filled by family members. Many princes have modern fighter jets as toys but won't fly them into battle--unless to put down the rebellion they fear.
3
Just read the article in the NYT about the cyber-hacking theft of millions of dollars from banks. One wonders whether ISIS is deriving resources this way?
3
ISIS is a Reagan Bush production.
Reagan armed what became the Taliban who gave bin Laden and AQ a home.
Bush destabilised Iraq society and gave them fertile territory to expand.
Reagan armed what became the Taliban who gave bin Laden and AQ a home.
Bush destabilised Iraq society and gave them fertile territory to expand.
22
Bush Bush Bush. Let's move on already. You seem to forget that Reagan armed rebels in Afghanistan who at the time were not considered terrorist. The weapons were mainly ground to surface missiles which brought down the russian aircraft. The defeat of the communist in Afghanistan contributed to the collapse of the Soviet Union. Obama never recognized the danger of ISIS and until recently called them the JV team.
2
You forgot to mention Bill Clinton, Chicken Hawk in Chief, who capered with an intern while discussing the Bosnian air war with Sen. Mike DeWine, the FBI interviews show. Sebrenica came as no surprise. "Why, treat everyone to their just desserts, and who shall 'scape whipping?", the prince of Denmark asked.
3
MF
You and the guilty own up, I will move on.
You and the guilty own up, I will move on.
3
This IS an unending war. We cannot win this war and Obama knows that. We are being hoodwinked all over again, but this time by an intellectual President who should know better. Shame.
10
You say he knows that. Are you sure.
His modus operandi is "half measures" (and usually clumsily and ineptly delayed) on whatever subject you wish to discuss—healthcare reform, response to Sandy Hook, Afghanistan "surge", you name it.
His modus operandi is "half measures" (and usually clumsily and ineptly delayed) on whatever subject you wish to discuss—healthcare reform, response to Sandy Hook, Afghanistan "surge", you name it.
3
I have no love for obama. We can't withdraw to fortress america like we did prior to WWII. We can't wait for the terrorists to become strong enough, as hitler and Japan did, and threaten the U.S. with destruction.
1
If he's so "intellectual" why does he still refuse to release his undergrad and law school transcripts? Can one be "intellectual" and "transparent" simultaneously?
3
Does anyone have any doubt that if we had not lied before the world and then invaded Iraq that ISIS would not have happened? We have caused so much death, destruction, pain and suffering.
24
We have to play the hand we're dealt. Had Carter not ignored Iran in 1979, and Reagan not bailed out of Beirut after the USMC barracks bombing in 1982, and Clinton not bailed out of Somalia after Black Hawk Down 1993 or 4, we would not be in this pickle. You can't reason with fanatics, they're all like kamikaze pilots, stoked on martyrdom.
3
It's an outrage that Bill Clinton lied through his teeth when he warned Bush and America about Iraqi WMDs
1
Clinton was suckered into Somalia by Papa Bush. Clinton was told that the UN would take over the mission before Clinton's inauguration.
1
"ISIS Raises Fear of Unending War" according to your lead-in headline. But was not "perpetual war" the very objective of the neocons behind the "American Century". Surely that was the reason for the invasion of Iraq, the destruction of Libya, the present suffering and death in Syria. These ventures surely prove the success of the neocon "project". There would be no ISIS otherwise. We created it. Fanatics rule on all sides now.
16
And? How exactly does this help understand what to do about ISIS? We have a wolf knocking at the door. National self-flagellation is not a defense strategy.
1
Thank you, Saudi Arabia & other Gulf Sunni sources for backing ISIS & giving the Pentagon the longterm enemy it so dearly needs to keep its budgets high & dry.
9
The world does not need Islamic theocracies or their extreme instruments of religious barbarism. ISIS et al are simply the rogue foreign policy instruments of Wahabbi theocracies. Eliminate the theocracies, their funding and their madrassas and ISIS et al will disappear in a relatively short time. ISIS et al are merely the piranah that swim in the Islamic waters.
The world's options for dealing with both the theocracies and their ISIS proxies are getting more and more limited. Some claim that it might be a victory for the extremists should the world's civilized countries invade, occupy and banish the theocracies of the middle east. That such a victory would prove that the freedoms aspired to in the west would somehow be hollowed out by such a reversion to imperialist force.
Maybe it's time to risk it.
The world's options for dealing with both the theocracies and their ISIS proxies are getting more and more limited. Some claim that it might be a victory for the extremists should the world's civilized countries invade, occupy and banish the theocracies of the middle east. That such a victory would prove that the freedoms aspired to in the west would somehow be hollowed out by such a reversion to imperialist force.
Maybe it's time to risk it.
1
No.
5
Guess this shows how good a JV team can get when its opponent practices 'strategic patience'.
5
Weeds and pests find new ways to grow and thrive. The root of all evil is money. As long as capitalism survives as it is today, ISIS - or it's equivalent - will survive.
9
Stu, Our UN Ambassador is toothless as is the UN. It's time to re-name the ISIS or ISIL to ISME - Islamic State of the Middle East. I do not understand why we are doing all the heavy-lifting? The countries affected are barely lifting a finger. To make matters worse, some of their own citizens are either financing these murderers or letting their citizens join them. The ISIS has morphed into Stage III Cancer. All the Radiation and Chemotherapy is not going to stanch the progress to Stage IV. Unless the countries affected go all out to stop these maniacs our bombing and drone attacks will be of no consequence. Our boots on the ground will not be of much help either because these wily beings know the lay of the land better. It will only result in loss of our brave, young lives in vain.Turning to the UN is an exercise in futility. The Caliphate is not a member of the UN nor will it ever be and so will flout any Human Rights and International laws with impunity. We should take care of our own shores first before it's too late. There are already a few scattered seeds that could take roots, but they are few and in between (at least I hope so ). These need to be squelched never to rise again.We have geographical advantage. Let's make use of it.
3
The failed U.S. policy of regime change in Iraq, Egypt, and Libya has worked to turn the Arab Spring into our winter nightmare with ISIS as the latest agent of death and terror. Without any guiding strategic, political vision for the region, we have been fumbling with a restrained tactical military response to ISIS. Iraq like Syria are both artificial countries created by Britain and France, under the guidance of the British Orientalist, Gertrude Bell, almost a century ago after the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in World War I. These countries made no sense then nor do they now, and military intervention only serves to preserve these politically dysfunctional Humpty-Dumpty creations. From both a "realpolitick" military and political perspective, our best hope of actually defeating ISIS quickly is to create a State of Kurdistan in Syria and northern Iraq. The Kurds have proven to be our best hope for "boots on the ground" and are the largest ethnic minority in that region. A new political entity that includes some existing oil fields would be both politically and economically viable. It would also get us the strong support of Turkey which has been dealing with a restive Kurdish minority in that area. A Kurdish state could provide the political solution that would defeat ISIS now before they metastasize to other regions.
4
Kurds refers to an ethnic language group split across four or more countries with variations from orthodox Sunni to Isis Sunni to commies. They have a history it terrorism according to the U.S. and have been in a long civil war in Turkey that has killed tens of thousands.
Iraqui Kurds have been recently whipped on repeated occasions in Iraq and in Iraq have two major factions at odds with each other and in the region have a history of civil strife and feuds amongst themselves. Rather than de facto break Iraq up and have a new mess, the U.S. will only send weapons to Baghdad to send on or not. Our NATO "ally" Turkey is emphatically against Kurd independence and would apparently rather do business with Daesh.
Tho a fan of Kobani commie Kurds, that is no reason to ignore reality.
Iraqui Kurds have been recently whipped on repeated occasions in Iraq and in Iraq have two major factions at odds with each other and in the region have a history of civil strife and feuds amongst themselves. Rather than de facto break Iraq up and have a new mess, the U.S. will only send weapons to Baghdad to send on or not. Our NATO "ally" Turkey is emphatically against Kurd independence and would apparently rather do business with Daesh.
Tho a fan of Kobani commie Kurds, that is no reason to ignore reality.
The Kurds have their part of Iraq, that's semi-official now, that's why they've been defending it so bravely. It includes several oil refineries. Turkey has no choice but to accept it, esp. since Turkey, now a Nato member, still has the Armenian genocide (1.5m dead) to account for and must become less repressive.
For as long as anyone can remember, there have been pockets of terrible brutality around the world. Rwanda, Bangla Desh, the Congo, Sudan, Biafra, Liberia, Chile, Argentina, Algeria, My Lai...vicious, bloody, ruthless, horrors.
The difference this time is that these jokers have a logo and use the Internet and encourage wackos in to shoot cartoonists and mall shoppers in countries that are otherwise stable and peaceful.
It's crazy. 99% of America couldn't tell you what the Crusades were, when they happened, what they were about, and are far more interested in the Kardashians than in the Charles of Anjou.
The difference this time is that these jokers have a logo and use the Internet and encourage wackos in to shoot cartoonists and mall shoppers in countries that are otherwise stable and peaceful.
It's crazy. 99% of America couldn't tell you what the Crusades were, when they happened, what they were about, and are far more interested in the Kardashians than in the Charles of Anjou.
3
And we were all supposed to believe that this was the "JV" team. Perhaps someone can give a copy of this article to the White House.
2
This news story should be read in conjunction with today's NYT article on the inadequacies of Iraq and the Iraqi army. The whole network of governments supported by the US for several decades in the Arab world appears to be in retreat. This would suggest that the basic architecture of American foreign policy is failing.
What is intriguing is that the Islamic State is highly successful with just a fraction of the military forces available to the established regimes. Tens of thousands of ISIL fighters can defeat or counter hundreds of thousands of soldiers belonging to the established regimes. Western military assistance and advising seem ineffective in the Arab world if not the Muslim world in general.
What is intriguing is that the Islamic State is highly successful with just a fraction of the military forces available to the established regimes. Tens of thousands of ISIL fighters can defeat or counter hundreds of thousands of soldiers belonging to the established regimes. Western military assistance and advising seem ineffective in the Arab world if not the Muslim world in general.
6
Wasn't the same apparent disparity in military strength also on display in Vietnam?
This is not a "war on terror," but a war to preserve the post-colonial Middle Eastern power structures that ISIS would overturn. Radical Islam may provide the ideological basis of ISIS, but its social and political basis is the desire of the oppressed and dispossessed classes of the Middle East to overthrow the corrupt, Western-supported regimes there. The Iranian revolution was the first installment in a long program of profound change which, given the religious character of the Middle East, finds a religious expression.
Even considering the oil interest, the United States does not have such a large stake in the Middle East that war against ISIS is necessarily in our best interest. Even if ISIS as such could somehow be crushed, the same social and political forces will bring about eventual revolution in this region. We can defend neither Israel nor the House of Saud forever. Each will fall eventually.
Better to get on the right side of history now and make the necessary accommodations. We would not be facing such a dangerous opponent now if we had done so earlier.
Even considering the oil interest, the United States does not have such a large stake in the Middle East that war against ISIS is necessarily in our best interest. Even if ISIS as such could somehow be crushed, the same social and political forces will bring about eventual revolution in this region. We can defend neither Israel nor the House of Saud forever. Each will fall eventually.
Better to get on the right side of history now and make the necessary accommodations. We would not be facing such a dangerous opponent now if we had done so earlier.
12
The only specific "necessary accommodations" that you mention are the ending of our support for Israel and Saudi Arabia. Any others?
1
Precisely.
As Winston Churchill said: "You can always rely on the US to do the right thing, after they have tried all other options." Unfortunately, there's one little garden spot in the Middle East that limits our opportunities to do the right thing so the show must go on.
As Winston Churchill said: "You can always rely on the US to do the right thing, after they have tried all other options." Unfortunately, there's one little garden spot in the Middle East that limits our opportunities to do the right thing so the show must go on.
1
Timbob: You think ending support for Israel and Saudi Arabia is no big deal? Those are the current cornerstones of our policy.
But yes. Support the Islamic Brotherhood in Egypt. Negotiate with ISIS and redraw the Iraq-Syria border. Eventually close down all our Middle Eastern bases.
But yes. Support the Islamic Brotherhood in Egypt. Negotiate with ISIS and redraw the Iraq-Syria border. Eventually close down all our Middle Eastern bases.
Ok here goes. Joe Lieberman, you were right. Senator joe warned of wished-for caliphate years ago & I laughed. Thought u were just delusional. Now it's coming into existence before our eyes. Good luck children with that.
1
Warmonger Joe Leiberman is part of the problem.
13
Lieberman was right, Bush was right, Cheney was right, Podesta was right, Romney was right. The only person who has been consistently wrong is Obama
2
To paraphrase Voltaire, if ISIS did not exist, the American military-intelligence-industrial complex would have to invent it. As James Risen detailed in his recent book, the "war on terror" has been very good for them financially, and they will always find a way to claim that it is necessary.
22
Until the countries affected by ISIS (and whatever jihadist movements may develop in the future) are willing to fight to preserve their own interests, the U.S. has absolutely no business doing it for them. Absolutely no business!
10
ISIS while pure evil is not cause for us to escalate and put active Western military on the ground. Americans are war weary and want to make sure we are not getting involved in a war that truly not winnable because of the slew of battling sectarian groups. Getting rid Saddam sped up this current historical cycle of sectarian violence. However the root cause of religious war by the sects has to be negotiated by the leading powers in the region not the USA who will be vilified if we expand war powers.
7
The Middle East is devolving into a large-scale religious war, and there are apparently no good guys in this fight. Because the ISIS leader proclaims to be "the leader of all Muslims, they directly threaten every Islamic nation in the region. Yet the Muslim nations are dithering in their response, expecting the U.S in the end to once again fight their battles. Should America commit our young men and women to fight and die for citizens of other nations who are afraid to fight on their own behalf? We need to stay out of this. Yes, they can be considered a threat to the West, and to America, but no more so than a dozen other jihadist groups. If we choose sides, those who we side against will redouble their efforts to perpetrate another 9/11 against our homeland. Fight them there so we don't have to fight them here? I've been listening to that baloney since Vietnam. We lost in Vietnam, and never had to fight them here.
13
Seriously, if middle eastern countries can't protect themselves from themselves, that is their problem. Let's get out and stay out.
13
One wonders where we'd be today if we had not marched stupidly and deceitfully into Iraq.
14
Probably the predictions of endless war or at least aggression will be borne out. But there is no reason for panic. The problem just needs to be contained until the movement (jihadism) exhausts itself. Wars cannot be won without ground troops. But with declining populations West cant afford to send any ground troops (maybe later we can send robot soldiers but that is still a long way off). Stopping the use of oil as soon as possible, however, will exhaust the movement of funds and the region of political importance, so that there will be less cause for West to interfere and both will over time calm the situation (and save the planet too). Maybe this needs a different generation of people on both sides too.
2
"A new global terror"? "New"? Exactly when did the old one end?
Ever since the Bush-Cheney administration chiseled the Addington-Woo theory of the unitary executive in stone and turned it into de facto law, we've had endless war -- and will continue to have it -- whether Congress (meaning us) likes it or not.
The disingenuous discussion we're currently witnessing -- like the one not long ago about massive surveillance of American citizens without probable cause -- is all for show. The genie is out of the bottle and We the People can't get him back in again.
Ever since the Bush-Cheney administration chiseled the Addington-Woo theory of the unitary executive in stone and turned it into de facto law, we've had endless war -- and will continue to have it -- whether Congress (meaning us) likes it or not.
The disingenuous discussion we're currently witnessing -- like the one not long ago about massive surveillance of American citizens without probable cause -- is all for show. The genie is out of the bottle and We the People can't get him back in again.
10
self-correcting: Yoo (rather than Woo)
2
It is impossible for the average citizen to know whom or what to believe anymore. Effects are mistaken for causes, causes are traced back to yet other causes, the mirage of the good guys resolves into a snapshot of evil doers and vice versa. I know that our policies have rarely been even-handed, that we have been lied to numerous times about important things, and that existential threats have been deceitfully conjured by those who expect to profit from perpetual war. As a citizen, I am fed up, and I feel great remorse at the evil we have set loose upon the world. Please, let's just stop now. Stop.
12
I'm glad someone has finally figured it out. The US unleashed all the forces of evil in the world today. Let's go back to Korea. Had the US not interfered in the 1950's North Korea, the north and the south would be living in peace and harmony, and the north would enjoy peace, prosperity and freedom. if not for US policy in the cold war, Putin and Obama would be playing golf and going to Bob Dylan concerts together.
Most important, but for US policy, women in the middle east would be treated with dignity and equality. They would be allowed to attend schools and never mistreated. But for the US, otherwise peace loving groups would never have slaughtered innocent victims, including children. Rival religious sects would be tolerant and respectful to each other. There would be no beheadings.
The US embodies all that is evil in the world, for sure. If we hadn't existed, the world would have reverted to the Garden of Eden. Citizens of this country awaken! Accept your punishment, renounce your country, so the w
putin and
Most important, but for US policy, women in the middle east would be treated with dignity and equality. They would be allowed to attend schools and never mistreated. But for the US, otherwise peace loving groups would never have slaughtered innocent victims, including children. Rival religious sects would be tolerant and respectful to each other. There would be no beheadings.
The US embodies all that is evil in the world, for sure. If we hadn't existed, the world would have reverted to the Garden of Eden. Citizens of this country awaken! Accept your punishment, renounce your country, so the w
putin and
2
So most countries in the world want the U.S. to stay out other countries affairs, not to mention that everywhere the U.S. goes it causes destruction. Guess what world? You're going to get what you wished for. Now that this evil is seeding itself around the world, looks like affected governments will have to sacrifice their own blood and treasure to fight this evil and do it their own way. Maybe even better than the U.S. Be careful what you wish for, because it looks like your wish is coming true. I hate to say this, but this takes the burden off the U.S. to solely fight this evil alone with our taxpayers money. Welcome to the club.
6
How does MENA get out of this mess? It's simple.
Governments in the region have to deliver ample and reliable services (i.e. electricity, sanitation, medical, education); publicly embrace the fight against corruption and mismanagement; uphold the rule of law; respect and protect all regardless of religious affiliation.
This is not an impossible task. It will require real leadership and a change in culture.
The question is, will they do it?
Governments in the region have to deliver ample and reliable services (i.e. electricity, sanitation, medical, education); publicly embrace the fight against corruption and mismanagement; uphold the rule of law; respect and protect all regardless of religious affiliation.
This is not an impossible task. It will require real leadership and a change in culture.
The question is, will they do it?
4
The simplistic claim that "governments in the region have to deliver ample and reliable services (i.e. electricity, sanitation, medical, education); publicly embrace the fight against corruption and mismanagement; uphold the rule of law; respect and protect all regardless of religious affiliation" often is made, but overlooks an important fact. A very small group, probably in the order of 1% of the fighting age population, can prevent good governance by destroying utilities; assassinating doctors, teachers, judges, and administrators as fast as new ones can be appointed; and conducting terrorist attacks on the worship services and places of those they do not like; and generally intimidating the population to reduce or eliminate cooperation with the government. Unlike the proposed benign and competent government, attackers like ISIS are not constrained by concerns about nonparticipant casualties and may be quite willing to kill large numbers to avenge even minor slights.
The government must protect everything, everywhere, at all times, while their committed opponents can choose the time and place of their attack and concentrate forces to be locally superior to government forces, and disperse into the nonparticipating population to avoid capture.
Like many prescriptions for complex problems, this one is clear, simple, and wrong.
The government must protect everything, everywhere, at all times, while their committed opponents can choose the time and place of their attack and concentrate forces to be locally superior to government forces, and disperse into the nonparticipating population to avoid capture.
Like many prescriptions for complex problems, this one is clear, simple, and wrong.
“We don’t want anybody in ISIL to be left with the impression that if they move to some neighboring country, that they will be essentially in a safe haven and not within the range of United States capability,” Josh Earnest, the White House press secretary, said on Wednesday.
If the White House thinks that ISIL has any doubts about US military capability and that it ignores the history of our recent massive interventions in their region, then the administration is seriously underestimating the intelligence of this enemy. If the White House thinks that this enemy will be cowed by air-strikes and drone attacks, then they are seriously misunderstanding the enemy's psychology, motivation, and dedication to their vision of a caliphate.
Sadly, it seems to be the case that the White House simultaneously inflates the threat that IS poses to our real interests and underestimates and misunderstands the Islamic State. After all the false fear mongering and futile war making of the past decade and a half, the appearance of mis-estimation and mis-understanding at the White House must indicate that further military meddling in the middle east will by mis-managed.
It's time for America to stop fighting wars in foreign lands. Use those billions of dollars intended for destruction abroad for construction at home instead.
If the White House thinks that ISIL has any doubts about US military capability and that it ignores the history of our recent massive interventions in their region, then the administration is seriously underestimating the intelligence of this enemy. If the White House thinks that this enemy will be cowed by air-strikes and drone attacks, then they are seriously misunderstanding the enemy's psychology, motivation, and dedication to their vision of a caliphate.
Sadly, it seems to be the case that the White House simultaneously inflates the threat that IS poses to our real interests and underestimates and misunderstands the Islamic State. After all the false fear mongering and futile war making of the past decade and a half, the appearance of mis-estimation and mis-understanding at the White House must indicate that further military meddling in the middle east will by mis-managed.
It's time for America to stop fighting wars in foreign lands. Use those billions of dollars intended for destruction abroad for construction at home instead.
12
How many American citizens has ISIS killed so far? YOu are willing to ignore foreign entities kidnapping, torturing and murdering US citizens at will? You counsel no reponse?
John, we have responded, we just haven't responded efficiently. Since last August we have responded with 16,000 sorties according to wikipedia:
On 15 January 2015, it was reported that over 16,000 airstrikes had been carried out by the Coalition. The U.S. Air Force has carried out around 60 percent of all strikes. Among them, F-16 performed 41 percent of all sorties, followed by the F-15E at 37 percent, then the A-10 at 11 percent, the B-1 bomber at eight percent, and the F-22 at 3 percent. The remaining 40 percent has been carried out by the US Navy and allied nations.[210]
Each sortie costs maybe $100,000 on average. So that's $1,600,000,000 of your taxes. Is this money well spent? Given the results of the several trillion dollars spent in Iraq and Afghanistan, it doesn't seem that we can fight and spend our way to peace and prosperity in the middle east.
The IS monsters should be captured and brought to justice but we don't seem to be able to do that. All we have been able to do with our military is kill and blow things up. The prospect of continuing making war for another 3 years as Obama wants does not include the prospect of efficient use of our resources or the prospect of peace and prosperity and good will arising in the war zone.
On 15 January 2015, it was reported that over 16,000 airstrikes had been carried out by the Coalition. The U.S. Air Force has carried out around 60 percent of all strikes. Among them, F-16 performed 41 percent of all sorties, followed by the F-15E at 37 percent, then the A-10 at 11 percent, the B-1 bomber at eight percent, and the F-22 at 3 percent. The remaining 40 percent has been carried out by the US Navy and allied nations.[210]
Each sortie costs maybe $100,000 on average. So that's $1,600,000,000 of your taxes. Is this money well spent? Given the results of the several trillion dollars spent in Iraq and Afghanistan, it doesn't seem that we can fight and spend our way to peace and prosperity in the middle east.
The IS monsters should be captured and brought to justice but we don't seem to be able to do that. All we have been able to do with our military is kill and blow things up. The prospect of continuing making war for another 3 years as Obama wants does not include the prospect of efficient use of our resources or the prospect of peace and prosperity and good will arising in the war zone.
4
Just because ISIS is extremist beyond any previous enemy does not mean that it possesses superhuman powers. Enemy outposts do not change the fact that if you deliver a death blow by piercing the heart, that's all that's required. Its extremities will not take on a life of their own. They will wither and die.
23
Yes, but the question is "does Obama have what it takes to strike at the heart of ISIS?"
It is the location of the heart that eludes us.
there have been worse "enemies", many equally or more ruthless through the ages. Strange to see this reiteration in moderns times, but maybe there is no such thing as modern times.
Groups like ISIS thrive in the void id war and failed governance, consequence of the Iraq War and Arab Spring, maybe the two related,.
They need to be actively engaged and defeated, but who knows where that will lead?
Groups like ISIS thrive in the void id war and failed governance, consequence of the Iraq War and Arab Spring, maybe the two related,.
They need to be actively engaged and defeated, but who knows where that will lead?
If ISIS contemplates to expand beyond Iraq and Syria, it picks territories, which are in a political and security vacuum.
The Sinai peninsula has always been a lawless region, neglected by Cairo. Ansar Beit al-Maqdis, an Al-Qaeda group was initially known for launching attacks on Israeli targets and interests. It only started directing its violence against the Egyptian army and police when Morsi was ousted in 2013 and the security forces cracked down on supporters of Muslim Brotherhood.
Libya has been in a state of anarchy since the 2011 uprising which led to the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi. It has two governments and numerous armed groups battling for control. What's worrying is that Libya has no national army or an unified force big enough to consolidate power across the country and it will take years to build one.
The country is oil rich and the rivalling militias have little appetite to share! IS takes advantage of the chaos and lures members away from groups, that have been weakened.
The Sinai peninsula has always been a lawless region, neglected by Cairo. Ansar Beit al-Maqdis, an Al-Qaeda group was initially known for launching attacks on Israeli targets and interests. It only started directing its violence against the Egyptian army and police when Morsi was ousted in 2013 and the security forces cracked down on supporters of Muslim Brotherhood.
Libya has been in a state of anarchy since the 2011 uprising which led to the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi. It has two governments and numerous armed groups battling for control. What's worrying is that Libya has no national army or an unified force big enough to consolidate power across the country and it will take years to build one.
The country is oil rich and the rivalling militias have little appetite to share! IS takes advantage of the chaos and lures members away from groups, that have been weakened.
Libya has been in a state of anarchy since the 2011 State:CIA overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi.
There, I corrected your error for you.
There, I corrected your error for you.
5
Recall the expression,
"You reap what you sow."
May all the "peace-nicks around the world take notice:
The world is filled will a whole bunch of bad guys that don't relate to anything that doesn't end in their own death.
Those of us civilized enough to recognize evil understand that it is our duty as a species to clearly communicate with ISIL and eliminate them from the face of the earth.
To do anything else will lead to more and more atrocities.
This group has no bottom to how low they can go.
"You reap what you sow."
May all the "peace-nicks around the world take notice:
The world is filled will a whole bunch of bad guys that don't relate to anything that doesn't end in their own death.
Those of us civilized enough to recognize evil understand that it is our duty as a species to clearly communicate with ISIL and eliminate them from the face of the earth.
To do anything else will lead to more and more atrocities.
This group has no bottom to how low they can go.
2
If the UN wants to declare war on IS then by all means we can help. You know like Korea, though that didn't turn out well.
Otherwise we should withdraw completely an let the Arab world work out their differences. The more we involve ourselves directly, the more danger and damage accrues. This show be clear from our experience these last 10 years. We never get into these conflicts with full force as we did WSII and so are destined to lose. Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan are outstanding examples.
Otherwise we should withdraw completely an let the Arab world work out their differences. The more we involve ourselves directly, the more danger and damage accrues. This show be clear from our experience these last 10 years. We never get into these conflicts with full force as we did WSII and so are destined to lose. Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan are outstanding examples.
11
Where's Congress in all this, and why are they stalling the President? They cheered Bush on for the Invasion of Iraq, which brought about the creation of ISIS, not the promised Arab Spring. And now Congress all of a sudden quiet as ISIS grows out of control?
This is why government officials, elected and appointed, should have lost their jobs, been prosecuted for the deception perpetrated on the American people for Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld Invasion of Iraq. We needed to set an example. We needed to send message to government and Congress that they will have to suffer consequences for what they do in our name. It shouldn't just be the soldiers, their families who have to carry the sole burden.
This is why government officials, elected and appointed, should have lost their jobs, been prosecuted for the deception perpetrated on the American people for Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld Invasion of Iraq. We needed to set an example. We needed to send message to government and Congress that they will have to suffer consequences for what they do in our name. It shouldn't just be the soldiers, their families who have to carry the sole burden.
10
Oh, mon Dieu! What an opportune time for US intelligence to step forward and suggest there are boogeymen lurking in dozens of countries around the world! I shan't sleep tonight! The U.S. has been on economic life support for most of my life and our beloved Congress, of which I had pinned such hopes, appears to be saving the country by nickle and diming their civil servants. We have a President who at the 11th hours wants to save the middle classes. How? By killing them on foreign battlefields? In wars in which will never end? Iraq sounds very much like Vietnam with a local populace little interested in fighting the Caliphate much like their predecessors lacked the will to fight an almost equally fanatical ideology. Furthermore, where is the money to come from? This wonderful newspaper has already withheld the story that a significant portion of the financial aid sent to combat Ebola is unaccounted for. How much U.S. and British war materiel, which I paid for via an effective tax rate equal to Mitt Romney, will fall into the hands of ISIS? Who are our friends anyway? Do we know? Do we have a government sophisticated enough to figure this out? They've made a mess of things thus far (and Obama, to be fair, is only a link in a very long chain). Is the American hillbilly going to buy this again. Unfortunately, I think they will. This poor country - I no longer think its worth fighting for.
14
It's easy to be critical of how our government has handled the threat of militant Islamic terrorist groups like ISIS or the Taliban. Sure our government made mistakes, but I'd love to hear a single constructive recommendation from the people writing on this blog. Isolationism is at one extreme and full engagement either militarily or with development work is at the other extreme. Letting the Sunni-Shia-Wahabi- whatever Islamic sects slaughter one another would likely cause escalating terror attacks in the US, Europe, Israel and any other Western nation with secular values. Without isolating Muslim countries and deporting Muslims who appear to be sympathetic to these terrorist groups, violence can't be contained. All it takes is one trained terrorist to inflict death and destruction in any European or American city. It would be almost impossible for us to stop ISIS with military force without inflicting massive civilian casualties. Development efforts are expensive, difficult if not impossible to implement in a war zone and take a long time to bear fruit.
Seriously, Islamic terrorism in the service of the establishment of a caliphate and motivated by hatred of the West is a big problem that is getting bigger. Pointing fingers and calling people names doesn't solve anything. If you have energy to think about this problem you should think about what we should do in the future rather than harping on our mistakes from the past.
.
Seriously, Islamic terrorism in the service of the establishment of a caliphate and motivated by hatred of the West is a big problem that is getting bigger. Pointing fingers and calling people names doesn't solve anything. If you have energy to think about this problem you should think about what we should do in the future rather than harping on our mistakes from the past.
.
4
If the countries directly affected by ISIL take no action, why should we? Unless they become state sponsored or create a state, they aren't our problem. If either of these things happen, we certainly have the means to destroy. Of course Iran may do it first.
6
Pretty obvious that military response won't work - in fact, it's exactly what these kids want. Like raging narcissists around the world, they feed off of a sense of persecution, and are unresponsive to negative feedback.
Can't say I know what the solution is, though.
Can't say I know what the solution is, though.
9
Ted
Tell it to the Kobani Kurds.
Tell it to the Kobani Kurds.
2
Exactly. If the US isn't there for them to hate, they lose their support. Their supporters don't so much love them as much as they hate us.
4
Sorry to say they are also unresponsive to any " diplomatic solution." I don't think ISIS will be satisfied by anything less than total victory, and they have shown that they are willing to die in the attempt. Realistically, a military response is the only feasible option, but half-measures will avail us nothing. At some point the West will have to take this seriously.
in reply to Einstein who writes, "Warmongers Reagan/Bush? Are you kidding?" in reply to my saying, "...President Reagan appears to have been correct, when he warned us about self-serving government bureaucracies, whose prime activity is to expand by appearing busy and defending inter-departmental turf so as to justify ever increasing budgets and power." referring to our Intelligence agencies:
It is silly and self-defeating to assume because someone (in this case President Reagan) may be wrong about some things -- even many things -- that he or she is wrong about everything.
It is equally silly and self-defeating to assume that because someone is right about some things -- even many things -- that he or she is right about everything.
Essentially, such absolutism fosters the kind of counterproductive polarization prevalent in America today. Of course, given that entertainer endorsements of products they know nothing particular about actually seem to sell lots of those products, I am not optimistic that we, as a society, will actually get better at evaluating what is said rather than simply reacting to who said it.
It is silly and self-defeating to assume because someone (in this case President Reagan) may be wrong about some things -- even many things -- that he or she is wrong about everything.
It is equally silly and self-defeating to assume that because someone is right about some things -- even many things -- that he or she is right about everything.
Essentially, such absolutism fosters the kind of counterproductive polarization prevalent in America today. Of course, given that entertainer endorsements of products they know nothing particular about actually seem to sell lots of those products, I am not optimistic that we, as a society, will actually get better at evaluating what is said rather than simply reacting to who said it.
3
And the drumbeats of war and fear-mongering continue. ISIS is estimated to be a group no larger than 20k to 30k. The U.S. alone has a standing army of close to 1 million. More, if we called up reserves. We could marshall more with allies in and out of the region if need be. ISIS is not a threat. When, amongst all the press this story gets, will a media outlet put their supposed threat in perspective?
If the people and surrounding countries want another authoritarian, militaristic, group of barbarians as neighbors and a continual threat, then let them. It's not our concern. If they want us to join in a coalition of nations to contain and beat them back, then fine. We should only join as one among many though. Not as the primary antagonist. When will those calling for another Mideast war entanglement learn their lesson?
Our country shouldn't go on war-footing until their is an existential threat. ISIS is a long way from that. They are nothing more than a ragtag group of minimally armed bullies.
If the people and surrounding countries want another authoritarian, militaristic, group of barbarians as neighbors and a continual threat, then let them. It's not our concern. If they want us to join in a coalition of nations to contain and beat them back, then fine. We should only join as one among many though. Not as the primary antagonist. When will those calling for another Mideast war entanglement learn their lesson?
Our country shouldn't go on war-footing until their is an existential threat. ISIS is a long way from that. They are nothing more than a ragtag group of minimally armed bullies.
21
And that same 'rag tag' group of minimaly armed Tango (Taliban) who never numbered more than 25,000 bearded hillbillies with Kalishnakovs, beat the most expensive army on earth, the $TRILLION a year National Security State, who bled Americans of $4TRILLION in unfunded deficit war debt, that is never coming back,and we will have to pay interest-only penalties on ... FOREVER.
On to Tehran for the Glory of Our Beloved Party Leaders!!
On to Tehran for the Glory of Our Beloved Party Leaders!!
1
Owning billions in oil wells makes Isis an entity to contend with globally.
February 14, 2015
Talk about body politics - dismembering the failed interior of Syria and then as well cutting to pieces the Iraq Nation - what is the infinite truth is using ones head is not in this debacle a given - as if to pretend the soul is for all hell bend justifications to evoke the ancient tens of thousands of years in the archaeological nomenclature of the beautiful land of The Levant the birth place for peace among - inscribed in the laws from god and nature eternal.
jja Manhattan, N. Y.
Talk about body politics - dismembering the failed interior of Syria and then as well cutting to pieces the Iraq Nation - what is the infinite truth is using ones head is not in this debacle a given - as if to pretend the soul is for all hell bend justifications to evoke the ancient tens of thousands of years in the archaeological nomenclature of the beautiful land of The Levant the birth place for peace among - inscribed in the laws from god and nature eternal.
jja Manhattan, N. Y.
2
Are you trying to sound Shakespearean? Cause you really make no sense.
1
If the regional Arab powers really wanted ISIS to be destroyed, it would be done within a month. We need to protect our borders from those who wish us harm, and let Middle Eastern/North African countries deal with ISIS.
16
The language our government has used for years is very telling, we have had a 'war on drugs', a war on poverty, a war on crime and now a war on terrorism. None of these campaigns has been very effective.
Some of us cringed when we heard the language of the absurd from Bush II after the 9-11 attacks that the planners and attackers 'hated us for our freedoms', and over time, that Iraq had ‘weapons of mass destruction’. On a daily basis, we were inundated with speeches and images of ‘mushroom clouds’ and ‘aluminum tubes’, the objective being to wage war to control the strategic oil reserves of Iraq and gain a foothold in the region.
One thing is certain, now that the pot has been thoroughly stirred by our military and defense strategies throughout the Middle East, the ranks of those joining ISIS and splinter groups is rapidly rising, due at least in part to our destabilizing effects in the area.
At what point do We the People say enough is enough?
Some of us cringed when we heard the language of the absurd from Bush II after the 9-11 attacks that the planners and attackers 'hated us for our freedoms', and over time, that Iraq had ‘weapons of mass destruction’. On a daily basis, we were inundated with speeches and images of ‘mushroom clouds’ and ‘aluminum tubes’, the objective being to wage war to control the strategic oil reserves of Iraq and gain a foothold in the region.
One thing is certain, now that the pot has been thoroughly stirred by our military and defense strategies throughout the Middle East, the ranks of those joining ISIS and splinter groups is rapidly rising, due at least in part to our destabilizing effects in the area.
At what point do We the People say enough is enough?
23
But the everyday decent working people of the US, or the UK, are not given the right to say "enough is enough". ""Peace" is never on the ballot paper. Alas the billionaire class own the media and their lobbyists the politicians. Democracy is now a sham.
12
Ultimately, the only "war" on terror which will succeed is one waged with ideas and, importantly, adherence to those ideas.
After 9/11, we had the perfect opportunity to suck the oxygen from those whose alienation from, and sense of inadequacy in the face of, modernity caused them to seek power in the only way they knew how -- through terror and brutality. But instead of nurturing the world-wide empathy for our loss and carefully targeting only those who were responsible, what do we do? Well, we ourselves unleash terror and brutality by killing, maiming and psychically crippling so many, and which such little empathy of our own that, to this date, we have no clue whether it's tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands. After all, it's only those"other" people.
Anyone who doesn't realize that ISIS and Islamic extremism which we so self-righteously condemn from our privileged perch protected by a multi-trillion dollar war machine are, in no small part, OUR creation has their head ... well, where the sun don't shine. And all you need do to understand this truth is to open your eyes to our history of droning from the skies, torturing, incarcerating in gulags for years-on-end, rendering to those even better at torturing and empowering the best thugs money can buy to "lead" other countries.
We may spout ideas of freedom, democracy, justice, individual rights, etc. But they are more evident in our breach of those ideas than in our practice of them.
After 9/11, we had the perfect opportunity to suck the oxygen from those whose alienation from, and sense of inadequacy in the face of, modernity caused them to seek power in the only way they knew how -- through terror and brutality. But instead of nurturing the world-wide empathy for our loss and carefully targeting only those who were responsible, what do we do? Well, we ourselves unleash terror and brutality by killing, maiming and psychically crippling so many, and which such little empathy of our own that, to this date, we have no clue whether it's tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands. After all, it's only those"other" people.
Anyone who doesn't realize that ISIS and Islamic extremism which we so self-righteously condemn from our privileged perch protected by a multi-trillion dollar war machine are, in no small part, OUR creation has their head ... well, where the sun don't shine. And all you need do to understand this truth is to open your eyes to our history of droning from the skies, torturing, incarcerating in gulags for years-on-end, rendering to those even better at torturing and empowering the best thugs money can buy to "lead" other countries.
We may spout ideas of freedom, democracy, justice, individual rights, etc. But they are more evident in our breach of those ideas than in our practice of them.
209
A fantastically patronizing response that also manages to exculpate the Arab world for its astonishing and mind-numbing failures as nothing more than this all being "our fault." And all done from the comfort of your iPad whilst you down another Venti at Starbucks.
9
Elian, ad hominem fantasies concocted to denigrate people which whom you disagree avail you nothing.
7
J. Cornelio-
When you powerfully tell the truth as you have done here, others may try to mock you.
When you powerfully tell the truth as you have done here, others may try to mock you.
8
The Arab world is becoming a more dangerous place.
My solution to the rise of the male-dominated ISIS and other terrorist organizations such as al Qaida in the Middle East, as with the prevalence of male-dominated despotic leaderships (read governments) in the Middle East, is that all governments in the Middle East should be turned over to and run by women. This should begin with the governments in Saudi Arabia, Iran and Egypt.
Why? The answer is simple. Women are generally very practical people. Women in the Middle East have only three priorities in their agenda: The family (read society), jobs (read the economy) and education (read civilization).
If all governments in the Middle East were operated and run by women, there would be stability (read freedom from terrorism), growth (read better run economies) and peace (read democracy).
My solution to the rise of the male-dominated ISIS and other terrorist organizations such as al Qaida in the Middle East, as with the prevalence of male-dominated despotic leaderships (read governments) in the Middle East, is that all governments in the Middle East should be turned over to and run by women. This should begin with the governments in Saudi Arabia, Iran and Egypt.
Why? The answer is simple. Women are generally very practical people. Women in the Middle East have only three priorities in their agenda: The family (read society), jobs (read the economy) and education (read civilization).
If all governments in the Middle East were operated and run by women, there would be stability (read freedom from terrorism), growth (read better run economies) and peace (read democracy).
4
Here is a chance for the US to lead and be remembered for its efforts. First - identify accurately the source and extent of the threats. Then, pull every string and every favor we have around the world and get nations organized to reject ISIS and the Taliban. It is not impossible to do - but it will need a sincere effort. At the end of the day, independent nations want stability and security so they may work on improving the lives of their people. The aims of ISIS and the Taliban do not fit into such a picture and this is what can unify the West and the Middle East against the scourge of extremism. It won't be easy and every angle will have to be worked with sensitivity to regional issues. For instance, India can be asked to work with Iran and Afghanistan - with whom it has historical ties. Jordan can be relied on to work with Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Egypt. And so forth... it is possible to unite the world against extremism, but it will need a paradigm shift in the way we approach these issues. Shoot first and negotiate later has never worked. We need to work with ground realities while being firm about the goals.
1
The Mideast is imploding and we maintain our presence there primarily to keep the oil flowing. That is not going to continue being possible forever, and we need to turn our attention to alternative sources of sustainable energy in a far more serious manner than we have so far. The recent drop in oil prices was an unfortunate circumstance which has deflected our attention. When prices begin to rise again, they are going to skyrocket and all sorts of pressure will be applied to despoil our earth in a mad effort to wring the last barrels out of the ground. Can we just think past the middle of next week for once?
9
My thoughts turn to the Western Roman Empire, imagining an especially prescient, possibly non-Germanic, Roman citizen wondering what year before 476 C.E. it is.
1
most of this has been business as usual in the middle east for hundreds of years. it's never solved. it's not supposed to be solved. it's a condition of life in a tribal society.
7
We don't need to step in, but we do need to stand by those fighting for their country and stand by our promises which wee made. The western part of Iraq is near collapse; if ISIS secures the Anbar region then they will secure a consistent supply line to their main forces in Syria. The tribal forces that are fighting have lost many and have shown their commitment not only to their country, but to the coalition we created and said they should lead. Those tribal forces are losing ground as they lack the equipment (some consisting of mortar built in 1941) and the manpower/training to succeed on their own at this point. They are begging for our help, and though I am not suggesting a full blown invasion like '03, I do believe it is time that we show we do not abandon those who do try to help themselves-which we (understandably) suggested they do-and send reinforcements on the ground. Sending a chopper that doesn't even fire a shot does nothing. We don't need to step-in, but we do need to stand by them and the promises we've made to them.
1
Limbs?
No, tentacles meant to strangle, choke and destroy civilization until those of us who respect one another bow to their will.
They are truly barbaric, hey, they video their destruction and murder. That alones disqualifies them from sitting at the table of rational thought.
The leaders of the civilized world must conference and reach a consensus about stopping the murderers.
No, tentacles meant to strangle, choke and destroy civilization until those of us who respect one another bow to their will.
They are truly barbaric, hey, they video their destruction and murder. That alones disqualifies them from sitting at the table of rational thought.
The leaders of the civilized world must conference and reach a consensus about stopping the murderers.
4
There is no question that this is where we should be concentrating all our military and political efforts. This is really and epic struggle. It is existential struggle for Western Civilization vs. barbarians of the 9th century. It is imperative that we eliminate this scourge from the face of the earth. NO other conflict should engage our attention, time, and money like this one.
The biggest problem is that despite our efforts it is spreading like a virus not only throughout the Middle East but also into Africa. Wherever there is Islam there is also ISIL or its clone. This the only military engagement that the forces of the US and NATO should be concerned with - if we lost this struggle all the others will be devoured by this ground of barbarians.
It is unfortunate that Obama does not recognize this as an existential struggle but rather as some sort of police action chasing bandits. In less than two years we can replace him with someone who recognizes the epic nature of this struggle.
The biggest problem is that despite our efforts it is spreading like a virus not only throughout the Middle East but also into Africa. Wherever there is Islam there is also ISIL or its clone. This the only military engagement that the forces of the US and NATO should be concerned with - if we lost this struggle all the others will be devoured by this ground of barbarians.
It is unfortunate that Obama does not recognize this as an existential struggle but rather as some sort of police action chasing bandits. In less than two years we can replace him with someone who recognizes the epic nature of this struggle.
2
Seems that you need to have him utter the magic formula, "Islamic terror" or some such thing, which we are supposed to believe will gain your seal of approval. In your experience as a head of state, that easily stuff might have worked for you. But then again, even if he did say those words you long to hear, one doubts you would be satisfied and probably write it off as him being insincere.
So after billions, maybe more than a trillion dollars spent on wars, NSA, and a loss of our rights to privacy, the low tech threats we were promised would be squelched continue to grow.
There has to be a better way than these wastes of treatuse, democracy, and liberty.
There has to be a better way than these wastes of treatuse, democracy, and liberty.
12
Perpetual war is about money and power...
Global financial interests in colonial outposts controlled by oligarchs pay for protection so cue the mercenaries.
The trillions wasted on wars could have been used to take care of America's people at home...countless lives could have been saved here instead of the lives of soldiers being wasted over there.
Change it, people...peace.
Global financial interests in colonial outposts controlled by oligarchs pay for protection so cue the mercenaries.
The trillions wasted on wars could have been used to take care of America's people at home...countless lives could have been saved here instead of the lives of soldiers being wasted over there.
Change it, people...peace.
42
perpetual war? what hubris -
WHat colonial outposts? We have none?
WHat colonial outposts? We have none?
1
Perpetual war is about religion. History proves this out.
The West will never topple the Islamic State as God is on their side.
If you don't believe that, just ask 'em.
The West will never topple the Islamic State as God is on their side.
If you don't believe that, just ask 'em.
I wonder what your letter would say if America's enemies were now running America----?
Our big mistake was treating Al Qaeda and now ISIS/Daesh as if they were nation states with formal military forces instead of gang bangers. In doing so, we inadvertently GAVE them what they needed to grow.
We brought over military equipment, guns, ammunition, crates of wrapped dollar bills, food stores and medical supplies (the latter two often courtesy of the NGOs who were brought along with us to help the refugees that bombing created). All the enemy had to do was either pretend to be with us (and accept dollars to later use against us) or loot from the conveniently located forward operating bases and lines of supply.
We then created societal collapse (by laying off the Iraqi army, bombing essential infrastructure, etc.) that created a looter's paradise and a lawless environment where extremist Islamist gang bangers could flourish.
We currently have gangs, organized much like ISIS, that exist all across the United States. We don't bomb the neighborhoods and destroy the infrastructure where they live, however, because that would be cutting off our noses to spite our faces. Imagine what Chicago would look like if airstrikes were used to dislodge its street gangs.
Yes, ISIS is more dangerous than run of the mill street gangs because it has nation-building aspirations. But it is constructed in the same way. It should have been fought as criminal gangs are fought; targeted raids to capture and imprison its leaders. Bin Laden warranted arrest, not a war on terror.
We brought over military equipment, guns, ammunition, crates of wrapped dollar bills, food stores and medical supplies (the latter two often courtesy of the NGOs who were brought along with us to help the refugees that bombing created). All the enemy had to do was either pretend to be with us (and accept dollars to later use against us) or loot from the conveniently located forward operating bases and lines of supply.
We then created societal collapse (by laying off the Iraqi army, bombing essential infrastructure, etc.) that created a looter's paradise and a lawless environment where extremist Islamist gang bangers could flourish.
We currently have gangs, organized much like ISIS, that exist all across the United States. We don't bomb the neighborhoods and destroy the infrastructure where they live, however, because that would be cutting off our noses to spite our faces. Imagine what Chicago would look like if airstrikes were used to dislodge its street gangs.
Yes, ISIS is more dangerous than run of the mill street gangs because it has nation-building aspirations. But it is constructed in the same way. It should have been fought as criminal gangs are fought; targeted raids to capture and imprison its leaders. Bin Laden warranted arrest, not a war on terror.
115
ISIS is more dangerous than run of the mill street gangs because it has nation-building aspirations.
Anything that fragments society's infrastructure whether in cities or small towns is an internal threat to the nation. Look to Mexico to see the results of not cracking down early.
Anything that fragments society's infrastructure whether in cities or small towns is an internal threat to the nation. Look to Mexico to see the results of not cracking down early.
You do not understand 'Barbaric Thuggery' and your words are totally ineffectuall---just ask the Barbarian Thugs what they think of your letter
The Taliban have been around a long time before we invaded Iraq. Radical Islam has been causing trouble since 700 AD. It's a real stretch to blame the U.S. for that!
2
How to defeat this barbaric, expansionist terror organization? "Hydra-headed conflicts" indeed. Cut off one head and it grows two. Absent Hercules or Heracles (Greek), the free world is left to its own resources.
While countries outside the region, including the United States, can play an important supportive, indeed crucial role, the burden of challenging and defeating this monster will have to come from the directly affected countries. Syria, Egypt, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan et. al. The United States cannot accomplish this herculean task alone.
While countries outside the region, including the United States, can play an important supportive, indeed crucial role, the burden of challenging and defeating this monster will have to come from the directly affected countries. Syria, Egypt, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan et. al. The United States cannot accomplish this herculean task alone.
14
Why doesn't Saudi Arabia take care of it and leave us out of it?
12
Yes. But what it should and can potentially accomplish does not appear to be a realistic expectation.
Why would you want to be dependent on the Saudis for our national security, Einstein? Isolationism solves nothing, as we learned in 1915 and in 1938.
Where are they getting their money? Where are they getting their armaments?
Who stands to gain? It is necessary to find and destroy the head of a hydra, not just its tentacles.
Who stands to gain? It is necessary to find and destroy the head of a hydra, not just its tentacles.
9
"Where are they getting their money?"
It's estimated they looted $400 million from banks in Mosul. They make millions from ransom. They are selling the oil they are pumping.
"Where are they getting their armaments?"
They cleaned out the armories in Mosul and other cities they overran. They got thousands of USA made weapons we gave to the Iraqis including communication equipment, Humvees, mortars and even tanks. They regularly overrun "moderate" Islamic groups in Syria and pick up the weapons we provided them.
It's estimated they looted $400 million from banks in Mosul. They make millions from ransom. They are selling the oil they are pumping.
"Where are they getting their armaments?"
They cleaned out the armories in Mosul and other cities they overran. They got thousands of USA made weapons we gave to the Iraqis including communication equipment, Humvees, mortars and even tanks. They regularly overrun "moderate" Islamic groups in Syria and pick up the weapons we provided them.
2
But of course our government leaders say ISIS has nothing to do with Islam and it's just a mystery that all these people simply don't understand that.
And the result is that we don't believe anything the government says as long as they insist 2+2=5.
And the result is that we don't believe anything the government says as long as they insist 2+2=5.
13
It is amazing anyone has the gall to say with a straight face "Islamic State has nothing to do with Islam." What's next: "The pope has nothing to do with the Catholic Church"?
In case Obama hasn't noticed, Islamic State has started publishing white papers citing Islamic passages supporting enslaving infidel women and carrying out other atrocities.
In case Obama hasn't noticed, Islamic State has started publishing white papers citing Islamic passages supporting enslaving infidel women and carrying out other atrocities.
2
So this is what Obama calls the junior varsity? I would hate to see what the varsity looks like.
11
Why should we believe these recent claims about the global influence of ISIS any more than the idea that it was a minor player, as Obama once stated? What is clear is that the U.S, and other western governments have as much to do with raising fears of a never-ending war as ISIS. In fact, both sides seem to desire a never-ending war, and every action taken by one side reinforces the determination of the other to keep it going.
7
People can go off on Obama all they want but he/his policies did not create the vacuum in the region that allowed this monstrous, savage group to take hold. Pres. H.W. was brilliant to know not to go in and upset the equilibrium. That a strictly enforced no-fly zone would serve to contain Saddam (as evil as he was) and that keeping him there would keep other regional players in check.
So Obama said JV, but seriously, how long are we supposed to send our men and women and our tax payer dollars to maintain the region? The only way Obama gets blamed for this mess is if we are ok with sending untold numbers of our fellow citizens to fight, die and get maimed endlessly for the benefit of the countries (many wealthy) in the region while many of the same countries sit on their hands and do pretty much nothing but turn a blind eye to reports of ISIS/Daesh funding by their citizens or governments. If we had not gone into Iraq in the first place, I would hazard a guess that while far from ideal we would not be dealing with this hydra like creature which apparently gets at least some of its funding from many of our so called allies.
While we are at it, can the Pakistani government, a recipient of our hard earned tax payer dollars please cough up Mullah Omar, and Ayman al Zawahiri? There is NO way that someone in the government does not know where these 2 are.
So Obama said JV, but seriously, how long are we supposed to send our men and women and our tax payer dollars to maintain the region? The only way Obama gets blamed for this mess is if we are ok with sending untold numbers of our fellow citizens to fight, die and get maimed endlessly for the benefit of the countries (many wealthy) in the region while many of the same countries sit on their hands and do pretty much nothing but turn a blind eye to reports of ISIS/Daesh funding by their citizens or governments. If we had not gone into Iraq in the first place, I would hazard a guess that while far from ideal we would not be dealing with this hydra like creature which apparently gets at least some of its funding from many of our so called allies.
While we are at it, can the Pakistani government, a recipient of our hard earned tax payer dollars please cough up Mullah Omar, and Ayman al Zawahiri? There is NO way that someone in the government does not know where these 2 are.
10
A couple of hundred extremists? Sounds like gang warfare more than a global war on terror.
But, if ISIS has declared a religious state, similar to, say, Ottoman Empire, then the answer, under law, is simple: we can declare a formal war against them since they are a sovereign and send in the heavy bombers like we did at Berlin and Tokyo 70 years ago.
Why do we always tap dance around everyone's sensibilities? We must make ISIS, and those who might follow in their path, surrender unconditionally. Do you think Germany would be the nation it is today if we allowed the Nazi Party and the Third Reich to remain in existence? Would the warrior fervor of Japan been subdued if the people still believed their emperor was god?
WWII required planetary destruction unheard of in human history to stop fanaticism.
Only that type of destruction will stop today's fanaticism.
Only when the ability of the enemy to wage war against us is eliminated, will surrender be possible. And the way we make that ability go away is to let the word go forth from this time and place that there is more to fear by opposing us than by surrendering.
But, if ISIS has declared a religious state, similar to, say, Ottoman Empire, then the answer, under law, is simple: we can declare a formal war against them since they are a sovereign and send in the heavy bombers like we did at Berlin and Tokyo 70 years ago.
Why do we always tap dance around everyone's sensibilities? We must make ISIS, and those who might follow in their path, surrender unconditionally. Do you think Germany would be the nation it is today if we allowed the Nazi Party and the Third Reich to remain in existence? Would the warrior fervor of Japan been subdued if the people still believed their emperor was god?
WWII required planetary destruction unheard of in human history to stop fanaticism.
Only that type of destruction will stop today's fanaticism.
Only when the ability of the enemy to wage war against us is eliminated, will surrender be possible. And the way we make that ability go away is to let the word go forth from this time and place that there is more to fear by opposing us than by surrendering.
11
Your comparisons are fearmongering. Get a grip.
5
WWII required planetary destruction unheard of in human history to stop fanaticism.
They will not hesitate to become martyrs if they acquire nukes. We can all kiss Western civilization goodbye as that would return the world to the Dark Ages or rather a Nuclear Winter age.
They will not hesitate to become martyrs if they acquire nukes. We can all kiss Western civilization goodbye as that would return the world to the Dark Ages or rather a Nuclear Winter age.
2
I do not think that it would take very many tactical nuclear weapons to completely destroy the ISIS.
1
I think we have to stop using the term "war" for what is happening here and what our governments are engaging in. In a war you typically have a clue about what your goals are where you are going and oh yes who your enemy is. We can't dignify what is going on here by calling it a war. This is a grotesque national security spasm a slow motion demonstration of bait and switch fear mongering and misplaced anger that is turning developed countries into police states and one developing country after another into smouldering hulks bleeding refugees and new extremists. Every intervention has been a disaster. Expanding the military mandate and creating a global free fire zone for special ops and killer drones will only make it worse. After more than a decade of war its time to shut the machine down let the affected regions in the world sort these problems out on their own. Surely they can do no worse than we have while we focus on humanitarian aid -- no military intervention -- no weapons sales -- just humanitarian aide.
112
well done nate. We have met the confederacy of dunces and it is us.
5
"Unending War" is nothing new in human history. What would you call the Roman Empire's conflict with the German tribes of Northern Europe? That
conflict lasted many centuries. What would you call the conflict between the House of Lancaster and the House of Valois which lasted from 1337 to 1453?
It is called the "Hundred Years War" actually 116 years but is that the best definition? France and England were at war intermittently from the Middle Ages through the Age of Exploration, the colonization period of the Western Hemisphere, and the European Enlightenment ending with the Battle of Waterloo in 1815. What would you the period between start of the First World War and the Fall of the Berlin Wall? One name would be the European civil war of the twentieth century lasting 75 years with a trailing conflict still going on the Ukraine. How about the two thousand year conflict between China and Vietnam?
What then do we make of the current war with ISIS? It is partly grounded in the thousand year old conflict between Sunni and Shia. It is also connected to the civilizational conflict between the secular West and the Islamic world dating from the Crusades and subsequent periods of Western hegemony in the MENA region. ISIS and other jihadi movements have deep roots in the history of the Middle East which is plagued with huge political and social conflicts related to the modernization of the region. But the war will end- someday.
conflict lasted many centuries. What would you call the conflict between the House of Lancaster and the House of Valois which lasted from 1337 to 1453?
It is called the "Hundred Years War" actually 116 years but is that the best definition? France and England were at war intermittently from the Middle Ages through the Age of Exploration, the colonization period of the Western Hemisphere, and the European Enlightenment ending with the Battle of Waterloo in 1815. What would you the period between start of the First World War and the Fall of the Berlin Wall? One name would be the European civil war of the twentieth century lasting 75 years with a trailing conflict still going on the Ukraine. How about the two thousand year conflict between China and Vietnam?
What then do we make of the current war with ISIS? It is partly grounded in the thousand year old conflict between Sunni and Shia. It is also connected to the civilizational conflict between the secular West and the Islamic world dating from the Crusades and subsequent periods of Western hegemony in the MENA region. ISIS and other jihadi movements have deep roots in the history of the Middle East which is plagued with huge political and social conflicts related to the modernization of the region. But the war will end- someday.
3
These wars will never end as long as we keep meddling in other countries.
6
It will take more than us not meddling. It will take total genocide of one or the other as history shows that no peace is possible that lasts.
1
Rodian, do you mean to advocate genocide? To kill whole nations and races in the name of peace? The victor of such a "war" would be unfit to inhabit the earth. Unworthy to do so.
2
Now that we have endured almost 15 years of war through two Presidencies it would be fortuitous if the next Administration came up with a strategy that made sense.
It is now obvious, even to the casual observer, that the way too hot Bush strategy was a debacle that led to the all too cold strategy of Obama which has also failed miserably.
Unless and until the United States devotes a concerted effort to rally a serious alliance.... similar to the one that George H. Bush was able to do during the 1st Gulf War.... to confront & decimate this growing menace once and for all then we will constantly be chasing our tail hither and fro for decades to come.
My fear is that this awakening will come about only when we are catastrophically struck again here at home. Are we willing to gamble and simply sit back & wait for that day to arrive? I sincerely hope not.
It is now obvious, even to the casual observer, that the way too hot Bush strategy was a debacle that led to the all too cold strategy of Obama which has also failed miserably.
Unless and until the United States devotes a concerted effort to rally a serious alliance.... similar to the one that George H. Bush was able to do during the 1st Gulf War.... to confront & decimate this growing menace once and for all then we will constantly be chasing our tail hither and fro for decades to come.
My fear is that this awakening will come about only when we are catastrophically struck again here at home. Are we willing to gamble and simply sit back & wait for that day to arrive? I sincerely hope not.
52
This is up to Saudi Arabia. NOT the USA.
7
I think you mean George H.W. Bush.
2
"...it would be fortuitous if the next Administration came up with a strategy..."
How so, fortuitous? (Happening by chance or coincidence, generally implying a beneficial occurrence or outcome.)
How so, fortuitous? (Happening by chance or coincidence, generally implying a beneficial occurrence or outcome.)
1
What exactly are their motives? What goals do they have? What outcomes are they expecting? I have yet to see this clearly articulated in even our so called responsible media?! In fact, as an ongoing unified entity, are they nothing more than a creation of the media?! Or are they just a bunch of terrorist groups who now have a name? In fact our government calls them ISIL, or something sounding like that! I'm suppose to understand this stuff, cause I'm a certified educator in the Social Sciences! And I'm often flummoxed! If I'm confused here, I doubt I'm alone!!!
5
"What exactly are their motives? What goals do they have? What outcomes are they expecting?"
To establish an Islamic caliphate (theocracy) that eventually will encompass the World, enforce Sharia law and either convince infidels to convert to Islam or be eliminated.
To establish an Islamic caliphate (theocracy) that eventually will encompass the World, enforce Sharia law and either convince infidels to convert to Islam or be eliminated.
1
Just exactly why is this of concern to us? There is absolutely nothing we can do to alleviate the situation and in view of our recent interventions we are only likely to make it worse. Let them fight their civil wars out by themselves. The ISIS fighters are totally different people than those who would come here to commit terrorist acts. That is a job for the intelligence services and Homeland Security, not the military forces.
12
"Just exactly why is this of concern to us?"
Don't you suppose many Americans asked the same question when Germany invaded Czechoslovakia and Poland?
Don't you suppose many Americans asked the same question when Germany invaded Czechoslovakia and Poland?
1
Perhaps "unending war" will keep on until the price is too high for those encouraging and participating. A world-wide verbal slap on the wrist for public beheading of captives is not a deterrent. And most of the rest of the world has the capability and the means to raise the cost to the beheaders, it seems to me. I wonder when they will require that bill to be paid?
Pogo, I'm sorry to say that the world, being a huge and in many places awful kind of mess, has atrocities to spare at any given time. Saudi Arabia has beheaded people recently, and they're not alone. (Indeed, if they would stop funding Wahhabi Islam, the violent sect, it would do more to stop terrorism than any blood-letting the rest of us could engage, whether by sword or bomb or drone.) Horrors abound in this world, and making a decent nation is a great thing, an historical wonder, come right down to it. Easy to lose, too, if that nation decides to try to control the world, to be an empire; it's happened before more than once.
2
Yes, besides Saudi Arabia beheads over eighty people every year.
2
The goal of ISIS is to create a caliphate. It is a Sunni dream that is hundreds of years old. It won't be bombed away And Infidel boots on the ground will only make matters worse.
It is a problem that the regional powers will have to to solve by themselves. So let the Saudis, Egyptians. Turks, and the rest do the heavy lifting. They all have a modern army that is powerful enough to do the job.
It's their willingness that is lacking. That should tell us something.
It is a problem that the regional powers will have to to solve by themselves. So let the Saudis, Egyptians. Turks, and the rest do the heavy lifting. They all have a modern army that is powerful enough to do the job.
It's their willingness that is lacking. That should tell us something.
60
"The goal of ISIS is to create a caliphate. It is a Sunni dream that is hundreds of years old. It won't be bombed away And Infidel boots on the ground will only make matters worse."
That depends on the bombs, I am sure a dozen or so tactical nuclear weapons would be more than enough to completely destroy ISIS. If not, there are always strategic nuclear weapons.
That depends on the bombs, I am sure a dozen or so tactical nuclear weapons would be more than enough to completely destroy ISIS. If not, there are always strategic nuclear weapons.
1
Why have our experts never figured out that we have no idea of what we are doing in fighting Mr. Bush's "terrorism," a vague generality that makes no sense in dealing with a real enemy. Instead of engaging in discussions with the Moslem nations to work out our differences, we have spent a dozen years shadow boxing with "terrorism" and spending our manpower and resources futilely, until now we are awakening to the real world. The Moslem world is in ferment with Sunnni/Shiite conflict. Why don't we wake up and try to help the Moslems settle their differences so that they can live together peacefully as they did before we rampaged into Iraq and destroyed their world? We are never going to get anywhere continuing to shadow box amidst the warring parties. This is only deluding ourselves that we are fighting terrorism when we are really making matters worse.
7
Why are you blaming Bush? Obama has been president for six years, and he won't even admit that we face a threat from radical Islam. He said with a straight face that Islamic State has nothing to do with Islam.
1
As if the old "global war on terror" had ever ended. And as if the consequence of to eradicate a tactic rather than defeat a specific enemy were not, inevitably, endless war.
7
The arms trade is 40% of gross world exports.
Regions of weak governance, poverty and isolation have always had bandits.
Now the bandits have machine guns, armored vehicles and I-pods.
Where are the arms coming from?
Regions of weak governance, poverty and isolation have always had bandits.
Now the bandits have machine guns, armored vehicles and I-pods.
Where are the arms coming from?
13
Regardless of the politics, for those of us with children currently on active duty in the military, this is nothing short of terrifying.
8
The barbarians are at the gate. It's a war of civilizations. All of our hard-won liberties and our way of life are at stake.
7
Our hard won liberties where? This has NOTHING to do with American liberties. It has nothing to do with us at all. At the gate? Where do you live? Turkey?
5
Decades of Saudi Arabia spreading militant Wahhabism across the entire region have created a cadre of young, disaffected men looking for a place to martyr themselves in jihad. Perhaps its time to leave the corrupt leaders of these so called allies to their own devices and walk away from the entire region. We could make lots better use of the foreign aid and military dollars here at home and history suggests we will never bring peace to the region through incessant war, force and violence. What exactly are we fighting for at the moment?
21
Sorry, Jack, "blame" is not a foreign policy.
Americans turned a blind eye to war and torture and are paying the price.
Theft (banksters) and murder (war machines) breed poverty and that is why poverty is exploding across this country.
End the perpetual wars...
There's much work to do right here in America and plenty of wasted manpower available to do it. The wars on the other side of the globe can wait.
Theft (banksters) and murder (war machines) breed poverty and that is why poverty is exploding across this country.
End the perpetual wars...
There's much work to do right here in America and plenty of wasted manpower available to do it. The wars on the other side of the globe can wait.
16
Confronting Islamic State's fundamentalist terrorism and psychopathic ideology must be as internationally based as possible. Given the recent depravity of its actions and the threat it has come to pose to so many nations, regardless of ideology, this should not be as challenging as it was just a few months ago. ISIS kills all people in all countries as it attacks the very definition of civilization.
We may be witnessing the rise of a truly common enemy the likes of which has never been seen before; very different from WWII where nations with great histories aligned themselves into the Allied and Axis powers.
We may be witnessing the rise of a truly common enemy the likes of which has never been seen before; very different from WWII where nations with great histories aligned themselves into the Allied and Axis powers.
109
All War is death killing & destruction. Most Americans don't want war.
No, it is not a job for the USA or the international community.
Why are you asking to drag the whole world into this mess.?
Let the rich, war warmongering Saudis handle it. We don't work for them!
We don't need a WWIII.
No, it is not a job for the USA or the international community.
Why are you asking to drag the whole world into this mess.?
Let the rich, war warmongering Saudis handle it. We don't work for them!
We don't need a WWIII.
12
Well said. The very nature of this evil is such that a frontal attack using military force is necessary but NOT sufficient. The West needs a well planned and well executed psychological warfare that exposes this evil ideology.
To be politically correct and talk about 'terrorism' without addressing it as "Fundamentalist Muslim Terrorism' (which Obama himself avoids using) is tantamount to treating cancer with 'aspirin'.
Fundamentalist Islam divides the world into 'the House of Islam' and the 'House of War'. That is, them, the Muslims, against the rest of the world.
Unless and until this wicked tenet is disowned by the world of Islam, we will see no end to the world outreach of ISIS. ISIS' barbaric ideology, fortified by modern communication systems and weaponry at their disposal, has the potential of destroying civilization.
To be politically correct and talk about 'terrorism' without addressing it as "Fundamentalist Muslim Terrorism' (which Obama himself avoids using) is tantamount to treating cancer with 'aspirin'.
Fundamentalist Islam divides the world into 'the House of Islam' and the 'House of War'. That is, them, the Muslims, against the rest of the world.
Unless and until this wicked tenet is disowned by the world of Islam, we will see no end to the world outreach of ISIS. ISIS' barbaric ideology, fortified by modern communication systems and weaponry at their disposal, has the potential of destroying civilization.
3
how many bombs must the US drop, and how many people must the US torture, before people around the world such as ISIS understand that violent solutions to our political and religious differences are not ok?
2
This is madness.
This would not be happening if we, the USA citizens, had tracked every move of the warmongers Bush/Cheney before, during, after they left office.
They have sucked the American taxpayer dry to pay for their self-serving military adventures.
This would not be happening if we, the USA citizens, had tracked every move of the warmongers Bush/Cheney before, during, after they left office.
They have sucked the American taxpayer dry to pay for their self-serving military adventures.
89
If only history could be so cleanly separated into binary categories, perhaps all these elements that you so nicely characterize as "causal" would have been evident to everyone. If this pretends to an "Einstein-like" analysis, it falls far from it. It's reductionist simplicity amounts to self-parody.
5
Remembering Colin Powell " If you break it, you own it". Put the blame on "W" and his neo-cons. Anyone ready for another Bush!!!
1
WARNING: The facts may be fatal to your rhetoric!!!
Terrorism has existed for decades in the Mideast. It got a great boost from the Soviet-Afghan War. Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the founder of ISIS's predecessor, set up a training camp in Afghanistan in the 1990's. He founded ISIS's predecessor in 2003 in Iraq, shortly after the US invasion. From the start, he targeted Shiites, not Westerners. He was killed in 2006 by US bombs. Thereafter, ISIS's influence declined. After US withdrawal, under Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, ISIS regained its earlier prominence and more.
WARNING: The conclusion may be fatal to your rhetoric!!!
ISIS began and grew and continues to exist as a terrorist anti-Shiite hate group. From its inception until very recently, it was a product of Muslim sectarianism without regard to the West. Blaming Bush or Obama or any other American for its existence and its tactics has NO BASIS IN FACT.
Terrorism has existed for decades in the Mideast. It got a great boost from the Soviet-Afghan War. Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the founder of ISIS's predecessor, set up a training camp in Afghanistan in the 1990's. He founded ISIS's predecessor in 2003 in Iraq, shortly after the US invasion. From the start, he targeted Shiites, not Westerners. He was killed in 2006 by US bombs. Thereafter, ISIS's influence declined. After US withdrawal, under Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, ISIS regained its earlier prominence and more.
WARNING: The conclusion may be fatal to your rhetoric!!!
ISIS began and grew and continues to exist as a terrorist anti-Shiite hate group. From its inception until very recently, it was a product of Muslim sectarianism without regard to the West. Blaming Bush or Obama or any other American for its existence and its tactics has NO BASIS IN FACT.
1
You forgot to mention Boko Haram in Nigeria who has started flying the Daesh flag in their propaganda videos. Can't say that they are run by Daesh, but the certainly have become affiliates.
8
Regardless of the alleged strength and breadth of "ISIS", let's not forget that ours is a nation "governed" by the military/homeland security/industrial complex. The countless billions, trillions spent on "homeland security", Iraq, Afghanistan and now ISIS fuels this complex "ad infinitum". The George W. Bush administration scared and bullied our Congress, our people, into an endless and disastrous war in Iraq based on lies. ISIS was spawned by the horribly corrupt and totally wasteful occupation of a country that was torn apart by religious and sectarian differences that go back centuries. As the Times' James Risen so articulately put it in his recent book, hundreds of billions of dollars went unaccounted for in Iraq, with billions upon billions being ushered out of the country and squirreled away in such bastions of democracy as Jordan and Lebanon.
So now the latest "threat" is ISIS. Are we prepared to spend countless billions on "combating" this group while the city of Boston cannot even function because of lack of funds to remove snow? While our tunnels, bridges, roads and infrastructure fall apart? While our inner cities teem with divisiveness and racial hatred? While tens or hundreds of thousands of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans are suffering from horrific injuries, mutilations and PTSD with proper treatment?
Isn't it about time that Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Jordan amass their armies, (with Iraq, yeah sure), and launch an all-out war against ISIS? Just saying.
So now the latest "threat" is ISIS. Are we prepared to spend countless billions on "combating" this group while the city of Boston cannot even function because of lack of funds to remove snow? While our tunnels, bridges, roads and infrastructure fall apart? While our inner cities teem with divisiveness and racial hatred? While tens or hundreds of thousands of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans are suffering from horrific injuries, mutilations and PTSD with proper treatment?
Isn't it about time that Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Jordan amass their armies, (with Iraq, yeah sure), and launch an all-out war against ISIS? Just saying.
67
We need to formulate and concur on a viable short and long term policy now, both here and abroad, whatever that may be, subject to reasonable modification as changing circumstances warrant, before it is too late to defend, let alone control.
1
Pre existing groups taking on an opportunistic brand name without any real organization is not a hydra organization. Silly article.
9
A so called war on terror is self-defeating, if anything it creates new recruits. Yes, the reactionary elements must be combatted and eliminated, but the fundamental war will be one of ideology. If the west boxes clever, plays the long game, it has all the resources at it's disposal to win.
1
It is a war for dominance between Shiites and Sunnis from which we would do well to remain absolutely neutral. Had we not meddled in the Middle East in the first place, we would not be involved.
We created our own involvement and now might do well to try convincing all Middle Eastern feuding parties that, if we are left alone, we will interfere no longer in any Middle Eastern religious or ethnic conflicts.
We created our own involvement and now might do well to try convincing all Middle Eastern feuding parties that, if we are left alone, we will interfere no longer in any Middle Eastern religious or ethnic conflicts.
22
Donald,
If that was what was happening you might be right. However what is happening is a fight to see who gets to go on and reconquer all the territory that has been lost to the "West" and "Western Ideas" in the last 500 years. After that they will try and conquer what's left too! If you don't see that now just wait awhile and it will become Crystal Clear, even to you.
If that was what was happening you might be right. However what is happening is a fight to see who gets to go on and reconquer all the territory that has been lost to the "West" and "Western Ideas" in the last 500 years. After that they will try and conquer what's left too! If you don't see that now just wait awhile and it will become Crystal Clear, even to you.
An Unending War that started because of the desire of one man to withdraw American forces from an Iraq where we spilled blood and treasure to successfully free people from tyranny.
1
Don't you mean "an unending war that started because of one man's desire to deploy American forces to Iraq" for what amounted to unspecific goals and unforeseen consequences?
16
We have spent decades buying oil from the Saudis at prices so inflated they could be halved overnight, as we are now seeing. It is estimated that the House of Saud has invested more than $100 billion on exporting fanatical Wahhabism, which directly sponsors and arms ISIS.
How Ironic that this may be the first war in history where we have ended up subsidizing our own enemy. And paying the enemy at the pumps to kill our troops in the desert.
How Ironic that this may be the first war in history where we have ended up subsidizing our own enemy. And paying the enemy at the pumps to kill our troops in the desert.
242
Reminds us of the scene in Catch 22 where Milo has his own airfield bombed to reap his war profit $$$.
2
Sources for the claim that the US pays twice the going rate for oil from Saudis please?
@Steve
It is ironic, indeed. We did not stop to calculate the ways in which our self-interest was funding people with whom we view almost everything in life from an opposite perspective, nor have we responded in recent decades with a strategy vis a vis the world that would back us out of this co-dependency.
And nations the world over are happy to label this as America's problem and fault, a truly ironic posture when you consider how long Americans provided a first-responder role in all global mischief-making.
Tough to hear this from a country of 10 million surrounded by water that is a healthy distance from most of the struggles, and always defended by Americans.
Is there a reasonable and modern means to reconcile this irony? Our President refuses to tax gasoline and wants to veto a pipeline running from Canada to Nebraska. I wish the American posture did not feel like a continued kicking of the can down the road. But it is tough to take on immediate pain when the alternative is imperceptible to measure.
It is ironic, indeed. We did not stop to calculate the ways in which our self-interest was funding people with whom we view almost everything in life from an opposite perspective, nor have we responded in recent decades with a strategy vis a vis the world that would back us out of this co-dependency.
And nations the world over are happy to label this as America's problem and fault, a truly ironic posture when you consider how long Americans provided a first-responder role in all global mischief-making.
Tough to hear this from a country of 10 million surrounded by water that is a healthy distance from most of the struggles, and always defended by Americans.
Is there a reasonable and modern means to reconcile this irony? Our President refuses to tax gasoline and wants to veto a pipeline running from Canada to Nebraska. I wish the American posture did not feel like a continued kicking of the can down the road. But it is tough to take on immediate pain when the alternative is imperceptible to measure.
1
I can't help wondering at the extreme imagery being used to describe this apparent growth of popularity of ISIS. Our intelligence officials have, in the past, not been so accurate as to posit an "unending war" quite yet, even if the figure is at 31,000 as indicated. Troops that could be arrayed against them are many multiples of that figure, of course, should it come to war, and "unending" would not be justified even then.
But "sprouting limbs, hydra-headed, unending war" are terms that the NYT authors choose, and even where there is no presence indicated of ISIS, we're told here that the "influence" is surely there, too.
The article seems to push readers to support President Obama in his push for even greater war powers than he (or any president to come) already has--and the hesitation of Rep. Schiff to "write another blank check justifying the use of American troops just about anywhere" is well taken.
We listened to the metaphors and shrieks of danger before Iraq, and we lost trillions, lives, and whatever "war" that was. Aside from the war merchants and investors, no one won in that. Instead, more turmoil and terrorism were created. And it's hard to see just what more killing will accomplish now, but to give credence to the claims of ISIS that we are the terrorists in their lands, rather than the reverse.
But "sprouting limbs, hydra-headed, unending war" are terms that the NYT authors choose, and even where there is no presence indicated of ISIS, we're told here that the "influence" is surely there, too.
The article seems to push readers to support President Obama in his push for even greater war powers than he (or any president to come) already has--and the hesitation of Rep. Schiff to "write another blank check justifying the use of American troops just about anywhere" is well taken.
We listened to the metaphors and shrieks of danger before Iraq, and we lost trillions, lives, and whatever "war" that was. Aside from the war merchants and investors, no one won in that. Instead, more turmoil and terrorism were created. And it's hard to see just what more killing will accomplish now, but to give credence to the claims of ISIS that we are the terrorists in their lands, rather than the reverse.
39
Our invasion of Iraq destabilized the area, as many predicted. This is the result of Bush and Cheney, and all in Congress who voted for this ill begotten invasion.
I am an average citizen, but I was well aware of all the cons before the war. How is it that our leaders were blind?
I am an average citizen, but I was well aware of all the cons before the war. How is it that our leaders were blind?
177
@blockhead: Exactly.
When my husband and I read, in autumn of 2002, that $50 million was being spent to position warships and ordnance in the Middle East in preparation for a possible war with Iraq, we could not believe we were the only ones who knew that such measures were merely preamble to toppling Saddam and destabilizing the area. (Obviously, we weren't the only ones who knew this was crazy. You knew, too.)
A nanosecond later, we understood. There was a a boatload of money to be made for outfits like Halliburton. Duh!
When my husband and I read, in autumn of 2002, that $50 million was being spent to position warships and ordnance in the Middle East in preparation for a possible war with Iraq, we could not believe we were the only ones who knew that such measures were merely preamble to toppling Saddam and destabilizing the area. (Obviously, we weren't the only ones who knew this was crazy. You knew, too.)
A nanosecond later, we understood. There was a a boatload of money to be made for outfits like Halliburton. Duh!
4
Ya, the middle east was a beacon of stability in the world. Never a problem over there. Nope, everyone was holding hands and dancing with flowers in their hair.
2
Our leaders were not blind. They were bought and paid for. How do you think Cheney came to be worth something now no doubt past his $90 millions, last time I checked.
3
31,500 fighters without an air force or a navy does not constitute a threat to the United States, nor to our influence or power on the global stage. America sat out World War Two until circumstances called us to join the fight, and fight we did with unconditional surrender as the stated outcome. We have the world's largest oceans protecting our homeland - let's see how they can do before we ask our men and women to lay down their lives for another futile outcome along the lines of Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan.
109
But in those days Nazis couldn't just hop on a plane and fly into Newark, could they?
5
America sat out World War Two until circumstances called us to join the fight,
-----------------------------
Which Netanyahu will uncomfortably remind America of during his speech to Congress. No way Israel can trust America, never again.
-----------------------------
Which Netanyahu will uncomfortably remind America of during his speech to Congress. No way Israel can trust America, never again.
4
The British crossed the Atlantic during the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 to fight Americans on their own soil. Japanese carriers steamed across the Pacific and suprised America with their sneak attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7,1941. During World War I and World War II German submarines prowled the North Atlantic to sink American vessels carrying supplies to England. 2015 also marks the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the Lusitania. Sorry but oceans haven't done much to protect America from being attacked or invaded.
2
Not sure who didn't see this coming. If not destroyed, the Daesh will spread. Their ideology is very attractive to fundamentalist Muslims who have no hope for a happy life in this existence; their countries are dehydrating, their economies crumbling, their religion outmoded, their love lives loveless.
But I'm curious as to why this would be a new global war on terror, when the old one never ended. There's only one way to end the global war on terror, unfortunately, and it is extinguishing fundamentalist Islam completely. Thankfully, we will have a major assist in this from global warming. The main producers and sponsors of Islamic terrorism are Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, and Egypt, as everyone probably knows by now. All of those countries are due to run out of water soon, to the point where most of their populations will not be able to survive. Perhaps that will convince them that Allah is not actually in favor of their actions, but either way, it will destroy those countries and eliminate most of their populations.
And that's all that will do it folks, these people can't be logically convinced of the error of their ways. Their backward culture encourages savagery, and it can't be modernized fast enough. To fight terrorism, all we can do is eliminate all terrorists.
But I'm curious as to why this would be a new global war on terror, when the old one never ended. There's only one way to end the global war on terror, unfortunately, and it is extinguishing fundamentalist Islam completely. Thankfully, we will have a major assist in this from global warming. The main producers and sponsors of Islamic terrorism are Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, and Egypt, as everyone probably knows by now. All of those countries are due to run out of water soon, to the point where most of their populations will not be able to survive. Perhaps that will convince them that Allah is not actually in favor of their actions, but either way, it will destroy those countries and eliminate most of their populations.
And that's all that will do it folks, these people can't be logically convinced of the error of their ways. Their backward culture encourages savagery, and it can't be modernized fast enough. To fight terrorism, all we can do is eliminate all terrorists.
5
If we can defeat terrorism by eliminating terrorists, why do we insist on creating more of them?
All this started, of course, when we broke the state in Iraq, which led to a deepening conflict between Shia and Sunni tribes. Like Humpty Dumpty, all the king's forces can't create a viable state in Iraq until one side decisively defeats the other. It may take 30 years.
Many civil wars are vicious, this one more than most.
Many civil wars are vicious, this one more than most.
13
I'm always stunned when I read about isis successes, and see their troop count. 20000 soldiers for a global war. something doesn't make sense. either they have the tacit support of a significantly larger, but silent group; or the fight against them is poorly handled. i expect the former. i also remain very confident that time is not on their side.
7
I'm even more stunned by the fact that we deployed far more than 20,000 troops in Iraq, Afghanistan...and yes, even years ago in Viet Nam...and repeatedly failed. What should we learn from those experiences?
3
The assertion that the Islamic State is expanding all over the Middle East comes from administration officials who have an interest in promoting a "global war on terror." In other words, unending war, with lots of so-called collateral damage as we drop drones on wedding parties, grandmothers and children gathering firewood, etc. And as we spy on everyone everywhere and endow every local police force with expensive military equipment. Yes! Let's create more enemies and use them to justify an unending supply of money to the military-industrial-police-prison complex.
98
Or we can just wait and see what they do when the arrive here. Especially what they do to women when they arrive here!
And in facing the reality that ISIS has become, were war fever afflicted GW Bush, Dick Cheney and the neo-conservatives at the American Enterprise Institute correct when saying -the US and the world are "better off" without Saddam?
His secular regime was likely the only one in the region that would have ensured Isis would never control territory. Churchill on war: "Never, never, never believe any war will be smooth and easy or that anyone who embarks on that strange voyage can measure the tides and hurricanes he will encounter. The statesman who yields to war fever must realize that once the signal is given, he is no longer the master of policy but the slave of unforeseeable and uncontrollable events… incompetent or arrogant commanders, untrustworthy allies, hostile neutrals, malignant fortune, ugly surprise, awful miscalculations."
His secular regime was likely the only one in the region that would have ensured Isis would never control territory. Churchill on war: "Never, never, never believe any war will be smooth and easy or that anyone who embarks on that strange voyage can measure the tides and hurricanes he will encounter. The statesman who yields to war fever must realize that once the signal is given, he is no longer the master of policy but the slave of unforeseeable and uncontrollable events… incompetent or arrogant commanders, untrustworthy allies, hostile neutrals, malignant fortune, ugly surprise, awful miscalculations."
248
It's true, Saddam Insane had what we do not: ruthlessness. He'd know that when terrorists arise in a particular town, the most efficient way to make an example of them would be to bombard the town, slay every inhabitant including infants, and leave the rubble as a reminder. It's evil and genocidal, but it does work, and it's how he did things.
The question is though, do we really want to accept his brand of evil to fight a more chaotic and religious evil? I'd think the world would be better off without either Saddam's ilk or the terrorists.
The question is though, do we really want to accept his brand of evil to fight a more chaotic and religious evil? I'd think the world would be better off without either Saddam's ilk or the terrorists.
Why has Obama insisted for 6 years that the world would be better off without Assad? Only now, after training, funding and arming anti-Assad rebels does he back off his position that Assad must go so that he can focus on overthrowing ISIS.
3
Agree SW. It seems the whole 'Arab Spring' thing has met the reality that very very few Muslim nations are candidates for secular democracy. At least Obama didn't leap full bore into Syria as McCain would have done, causing the US, and the US alone, to 'own' the Syrian civil war, and its devastation - human and material.
6
This doesn't come as a shock since a stated goal of ISIS has been to create a caliphate. What I would like to get my head around are the justifications, here and abroad, to do little more than limited air strikes, rely on the Pesh Merga for ground fighting, and provide minimal humanitarian assistance to those in dire need.
The world sees this coming, and it's not a pretty picture. Those in power are letting down humanity at large, and I can not understand why they let this happen.
The world sees this coming, and it's not a pretty picture. Those in power are letting down humanity at large, and I can not understand why they let this happen.
7
Because the corporations that own this country make money from war.
8
As do the unions of Big Labor who fund the Democrat Party, who work for the corporations. Lots of $$$ there.
Relying on Pesh? It's THEIR land. Not ours. We are assisting THEM, not the other way around. IRAQ is NOT America. It's Iraq.
1
US intel's worried about "a new global war on terror". When did the one that began 15 years ago end? I missed that ending. The US still has troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. I guess I need to be explained the definition of "end".
Of course anonymous "counterterrorism" officials/"experts" and DIA Gen. are going to push the "new enemy" narrative. They and their friends make millions if we conveniently make the new ISIS-international what the old al-Qaeda used to be.
The author sums it up nicely. The article we have here is based on "little or no public evidence" that ISIS-international is a real, operative organization. Even if it was, we do not know how to address those types of threats. The US has hunted the "terror"-ghost for 15 years to no avail. Defense contractors have grown wealthy, the public conscious has grown callous, and the US has transformed into a terror-ghost-fighting empire.
ISIS is a problem. Al-Queda is a problem. The bigger problem is that the US does not know how to properly confront, and effectively end these problems. The notion that the US should unilaterally continue this "counterterrorism" strategy indefinitely is ridiculous. Stupid beyond belief. Let us bring the anonymous sources to light, silence the war prone generals, then have a public discussion about the proper way in which to approach US foreign policy. If we continue to do the same thing we've done, we will get same lackluster, pitiful results.
Of course anonymous "counterterrorism" officials/"experts" and DIA Gen. are going to push the "new enemy" narrative. They and their friends make millions if we conveniently make the new ISIS-international what the old al-Qaeda used to be.
The author sums it up nicely. The article we have here is based on "little or no public evidence" that ISIS-international is a real, operative organization. Even if it was, we do not know how to address those types of threats. The US has hunted the "terror"-ghost for 15 years to no avail. Defense contractors have grown wealthy, the public conscious has grown callous, and the US has transformed into a terror-ghost-fighting empire.
ISIS is a problem. Al-Queda is a problem. The bigger problem is that the US does not know how to properly confront, and effectively end these problems. The notion that the US should unilaterally continue this "counterterrorism" strategy indefinitely is ridiculous. Stupid beyond belief. Let us bring the anonymous sources to light, silence the war prone generals, then have a public discussion about the proper way in which to approach US foreign policy. If we continue to do the same thing we've done, we will get same lackluster, pitiful results.
181
ISIS Radical Islam controls 1/2 of Syria and 1/2 of Iraq and over 8 million people, they are in the cities providing government services including public welfare and education, they are getting recruits from 90 countries and currently have an available manpower of 180,000 according to published intelligence reports from our regional allies.
You sure did miss the ending! Obama pulled troops out of Iraq too soon just to score cheap political points while his advisers, the GOP and the entire world warned him that this exact situation would result!
Obama promised us he was leaving behind "an Iraq that is sovereign, stable, and self-reliant".
Joe Biden told us "I am very optimistic about -- about Iraq. I mean, this could be one of the great achievements of this administration. You're going to see 90,000 American troops come marching home by the end of the summer. You're going to see a stable government in Iraq that is actually moving toward a representative government,"
Barack Obama is the father of ISIS
Obama promised us he was leaving behind "an Iraq that is sovereign, stable, and self-reliant".
Joe Biden told us "I am very optimistic about -- about Iraq. I mean, this could be one of the great achievements of this administration. You're going to see 90,000 American troops come marching home by the end of the summer. You're going to see a stable government in Iraq that is actually moving toward a representative government,"
Barack Obama is the father of ISIS
If you believe that Generals want to go to war you are nuts.
Most of us agree that our troop presence and military escapades in the Middle East over the last decades has not accomplished the intended goal of diminishing terrorism. The US is perceived, with some validity, as the aggressor in these unending wars.
The only thing we can accomplish by pouring more of our resources into this troubled area is to make more enemies and, in the final analysis, facilitate the recruitment of more jihadists.
We should concentrate on the specific threats to our security here in the US and not waste any more of our resources trying to clean up the cesspool that the Middle East has become.
The only thing we can accomplish by pouring more of our resources into this troubled area is to make more enemies and, in the final analysis, facilitate the recruitment of more jihadists.
We should concentrate on the specific threats to our security here in the US and not waste any more of our resources trying to clean up the cesspool that the Middle East has become.
191
All that needs to be said by way of the numbers:
www.costofwar.com
www.costsofwar.org
Let us bring to an end our faulty thinking that we must be everyone's mercenary army in the troublesome Middle East.
Leave them to their ongoing differences taking place for ongoing and endless ages.
Let us look to our own security and not let them transplant their ongoing and endless difficulties to our shores in any form whatsoever.
www.costofwar.com
www.costsofwar.org
Let us bring to an end our faulty thinking that we must be everyone's mercenary army in the troublesome Middle East.
Leave them to their ongoing differences taking place for ongoing and endless ages.
Let us look to our own security and not let them transplant their ongoing and endless difficulties to our shores in any form whatsoever.
2
Isolationism is not the answer. We will have to be involved internationally to protect out interests and those of our allies. The how and where is the issue.
Indeed. But such views are not generally acceptable for public airing. General Petraeus said much the same thing (from a position of considerable knowledge and authority) and what happened to him? An immediate hatchet job and humiliation. As if that were not enough to deter others from speaking out, he's now facing a possible prison term.
It's the neocon and war profiteers' dream scenario - a never ending and unwinnable war on an idea rather than a state that will forever drain us of resources and lives.
301
It's odd how Obama just truckles to the "neocon and war profiteers'" machinations. Biden, too. Someone should let them know.
So, now you think Obama is a neocon? He has been in office for 6 years. It is his war we are fighting.
@DD
A little bit of a harsh critique of familiar and, frankly, shopworn targets.
America will withdraw from foreign entanglement when we: tone down our alarmist, all-in news coverage of each minute "cause du jour" (e.g., think about the Ebola panic), consider the shadow our culture casts over developing countries that breed terrorists (e.g., as the world's acknowledged leading exporter of media and entertainment that is not a little offensive to the crowd stoking these recruitment efforts), consider the bipolar response we have to building our own energy independence in North America (we will not be satisfied with fracking...only solar and renewables will suffice), and also consider the voracious consumer society we have become and the need to pull in inexpensive labor has resulted in exploitation in certain countries.
It is appropriate to point to neocon and war interests as engaged parties in this adventurous engagement in all foreign stirrings. But we thrust ourselves, all of ourselves, into the Middle East during the decades when we laid economic claim to oil. That claim happened to place us in the unhappy embrace of nations with whom we grew to be very different socially. To say that a bunch of neocons is the last remaining accelerant may be literally true, but it took decades of behavior to make America the symbol of all that ISIS leaders want to attack.
Backing out of this position will not be so easy.
A little bit of a harsh critique of familiar and, frankly, shopworn targets.
America will withdraw from foreign entanglement when we: tone down our alarmist, all-in news coverage of each minute "cause du jour" (e.g., think about the Ebola panic), consider the shadow our culture casts over developing countries that breed terrorists (e.g., as the world's acknowledged leading exporter of media and entertainment that is not a little offensive to the crowd stoking these recruitment efforts), consider the bipolar response we have to building our own energy independence in North America (we will not be satisfied with fracking...only solar and renewables will suffice), and also consider the voracious consumer society we have become and the need to pull in inexpensive labor has resulted in exploitation in certain countries.
It is appropriate to point to neocon and war interests as engaged parties in this adventurous engagement in all foreign stirrings. But we thrust ourselves, all of ourselves, into the Middle East during the decades when we laid economic claim to oil. That claim happened to place us in the unhappy embrace of nations with whom we grew to be very different socially. To say that a bunch of neocons is the last remaining accelerant may be literally true, but it took decades of behavior to make America the symbol of all that ISIS leaders want to attack.
Backing out of this position will not be so easy.
1
I suppose this means we're going to increase the military/spook budget so it hits 50% of our entire spending each year instead of the 33% pittance it is now.
120
Might want to check your 'facts' re: military spending. Even including veteran medical benefits it is less than 20% of federal spending:
http://www.concordcoalition.org/issues/indicators/federal-budget-pie-charts
http://www.concordcoalition.org/issues/indicators/federal-budget-pie-charts
5
jb-
Your numbers are way off!!! You might want to recheck it yourself. Be careful where you get your numbers.
There are some bigtime war profiteers and enablers on the 'Concord Coalition'.
Your numbers are way off!!! You might want to recheck it yourself. Be careful where you get your numbers.
There are some bigtime war profiteers and enablers on the 'Concord Coalition'.
3
Well , 18 to 20 % anyhow. Still pretty outrageous relative to what other countries allocate. In any event, this should silence those who believe that citizens should be armed in order to overthrow an oppressive government. If all citizens believing such malarkey were to band together and take on this government at 8 a.m. on Monday morning , they would not last until the 10 a.m. coffee break. In the meantime , with weapons available to all under this ridiculous interpretation of the amendment , the slaughter of innocent civilians reaches record proportions.
3
Two years ago nobody heard of ISIS. Now there is a group that, apparently, makes Al Qaeda seem penny-ante, when it comes to the ability to organize, recruit, and function as more than an oppositional guerrilla organization. This leads to the inevitable question as to what the many, many billions spent on our Intelligence agencies have actually accomplished since 9/11.
It would appear that we are still largely fighting yesterday's battles and threats, oblivious to what is coming down the road in our direction. One day no one seems to have heard of ISIS and the next it is a significant player and threat. ISIS did not suddenly magically appear, springing from Zeus' head or dropped in by a UFO. Why did not our Intelligence agencies which, one might assume, were supposed to have learned something from 9/11, have some sense of the dissatisfaction, politics, and organization, which lead to ISIS?
Unfortunately, President Reagan appears to have been correct, when he warned us about self-serving government bureaucracies, whose prime activity is to expand by appearing busy and defending inter-departmental turf so as to justify ever increasing budgets and power.
No President appears to have been or be willing to hold these agencies accountable, not simply in regard to questionable and rogue activities but, even more significantly, their abject incompetency.
It would appear that we are still largely fighting yesterday's battles and threats, oblivious to what is coming down the road in our direction. One day no one seems to have heard of ISIS and the next it is a significant player and threat. ISIS did not suddenly magically appear, springing from Zeus' head or dropped in by a UFO. Why did not our Intelligence agencies which, one might assume, were supposed to have learned something from 9/11, have some sense of the dissatisfaction, politics, and organization, which lead to ISIS?
Unfortunately, President Reagan appears to have been correct, when he warned us about self-serving government bureaucracies, whose prime activity is to expand by appearing busy and defending inter-departmental turf so as to justify ever increasing budgets and power.
No President appears to have been or be willing to hold these agencies accountable, not simply in regard to questionable and rogue activities but, even more significantly, their abject incompetency.
42
Warmongers Reagan/Bush? Are you kidding?
5
I couldn't agree more. For a long time I couldn't believe that government institutions and bureaucracies and intelligence agencies could be abjectly incompetent. I am now a true believer
It seems to me that we citizens have failed to hold our political leaders accountable for their utter failure to deliver on their promises, to tell us the truth at all times about our nation's course and options, or to heed our collective wishes as expressed in poll after poll. If agencies and generals have not been held accountable, it's because we have failed to force our representatives to represent our interests over the interests of the deep-pocketed donors who profit from the status quo of endless war.
5
While this comes as no surprise, what the US response should be is a matter of debate. In fact, that's what's really missing here: serious debate in Congress and the Pentagon on what truly would be our mission, our objectives, and our strategies as ISIS plants its feet in a multitude of countries.
Because ISIS consists of pockets of extremism here and there, It's more of a web than a nexus. Attacking a web means pinpointing every single terror cell or conflux of cells in an alarming growing list of nations.
So, I ask: what would happen if we did nothing? If we only do what we do routinely at home, and near American interests, which is top security and protection? Do we really want to spend so much money chasing phantoms who can vanish in an instant into the nearest cave? It's tantamount to trying to target and prevent every tragedy caused by a madman with a gun. We know how many those are, but they never come with warning.
And finally, it behooves us to ask why, since 2001, we've gone from Afghanistan, to Iraq, to Syria, to Yemen, to Libya, to Egypt (and I'm sure I've left a few out), hopscotching over the Middle East to avenge acts of terror caused by multiple groups of mid-eastern malcontents. France doesn't go to the ends of the earth to pursue these guys, nor does England, Germany, Italy, or Greece.
We'd better address the central question "why are we there?" pretty darn soon before we tax the patience and treasure of the American people.
Because ISIS consists of pockets of extremism here and there, It's more of a web than a nexus. Attacking a web means pinpointing every single terror cell or conflux of cells in an alarming growing list of nations.
So, I ask: what would happen if we did nothing? If we only do what we do routinely at home, and near American interests, which is top security and protection? Do we really want to spend so much money chasing phantoms who can vanish in an instant into the nearest cave? It's tantamount to trying to target and prevent every tragedy caused by a madman with a gun. We know how many those are, but they never come with warning.
And finally, it behooves us to ask why, since 2001, we've gone from Afghanistan, to Iraq, to Syria, to Yemen, to Libya, to Egypt (and I'm sure I've left a few out), hopscotching over the Middle East to avenge acts of terror caused by multiple groups of mid-eastern malcontents. France doesn't go to the ends of the earth to pursue these guys, nor does England, Germany, Italy, or Greece.
We'd better address the central question "why are we there?" pretty darn soon before we tax the patience and treasure of the American people.
460
Dear Ms. McMorrow,
I'll try to tackle that good question. We have to intervene in this, I think, because we're best able to; none of the governments where terrorism is rampant are strong enough, or determined enough. Many of them are seeded with people that tacitly support the terrorists.
If we did nothing, the strength of the terrorists would grow, and since the nations they're in don't have stable governments nor societies, they'd be able to take over and make real terrorist states. This would, of course, lead to genocide, as all these terrorists enjoy killing anyone who doesn't believe exactly what they do. So Shiites would be exterminating Sunnis and vice versa across the Mideast.
And eventually Pakistan would fall to these savages, and they'd have nukes, which they wouldn't hesitate to use. Their nuclear weapons would then have to be targeted with nuclear strikes, slaying hundreds of millions, and causing remarkable devastation and plunge areas into the dark ages, or potentially the stone age. Worst case scenario, but that's the eventual result of doing nothing about these terrorist groups.
I'll try to tackle that good question. We have to intervene in this, I think, because we're best able to; none of the governments where terrorism is rampant are strong enough, or determined enough. Many of them are seeded with people that tacitly support the terrorists.
If we did nothing, the strength of the terrorists would grow, and since the nations they're in don't have stable governments nor societies, they'd be able to take over and make real terrorist states. This would, of course, lead to genocide, as all these terrorists enjoy killing anyone who doesn't believe exactly what they do. So Shiites would be exterminating Sunnis and vice versa across the Mideast.
And eventually Pakistan would fall to these savages, and they'd have nukes, which they wouldn't hesitate to use. Their nuclear weapons would then have to be targeted with nuclear strikes, slaying hundreds of millions, and causing remarkable devastation and plunge areas into the dark ages, or potentially the stone age. Worst case scenario, but that's the eventual result of doing nothing about these terrorist groups.
19
It's really a very old argument, do we bring the fight to them or do we let them bring it to us as the French recently endured. Are we moving forward or backward? Do we want to live in the fifteenth century or the twenty first? It's not as if there is an alternative because there appears to be no alternative.
7
Christine, thank you so much for a thoughtful, well-reasoned Comment which so succinctly summarizes the reasons for the question "Why are we there?" White House - Senate - House of Representatives - we await answers.
21
First, daesh was the jv.
Now the media want a sexy story, and the administration wants to sell its strategy-less use of force, so Daesh must be made a worthy protagonist just like in a summer actin blockbuster. Marketing is everything baby.
Sure, this actually aids Daesh, gives it legitimacy, but the media has profits to make with the lowest cost and the administration has a brand to protect without stooping to having any policy or strategy. Neither dare address the domestic realities of war nuts and peace nuts with their own blinders on, or, heaven forbid, foreign realities. Fertilize Daesh while looking in the mirror and daesh will grow.
Congratulations american foreign policy rent takers. You are successful at what matters, getting those rents for yourselves.
Now the media want a sexy story, and the administration wants to sell its strategy-less use of force, so Daesh must be made a worthy protagonist just like in a summer actin blockbuster. Marketing is everything baby.
Sure, this actually aids Daesh, gives it legitimacy, but the media has profits to make with the lowest cost and the administration has a brand to protect without stooping to having any policy or strategy. Neither dare address the domestic realities of war nuts and peace nuts with their own blinders on, or, heaven forbid, foreign realities. Fertilize Daesh while looking in the mirror and daesh will grow.
Congratulations american foreign policy rent takers. You are successful at what matters, getting those rents for yourselves.
19
Yeah, let's ignore them and maybe they'll go away. Like Donald Trump or the Callipygian sisters.
12
The media is the problem? The NYT's is writing an article about the spread of the Islamic State and our most important and authoritative paper is doing this for increased sales of its product? Wow. That would be quite a story if it were actually true.
6
Great comment, Mr. Freeman!
BTW, Trump's own callipygian feature is viewed from the front, although somewhat obscured by a strange yellow gravity-defying mane.
BTW, Trump's own callipygian feature is viewed from the front, although somewhat obscured by a strange yellow gravity-defying mane.
1
Is this a "global war on terror" or a global war OF terror? Thus far, pretty much the only country that's been working to combat these madmen is our own. Weren't the Jordanians going to do everything necessary to destroy ISIS? When does that start? Their bombing campaign won't do the job any more than ours will. Boots on the ground are clearly needed: ours, perhaps, but not ours alone. This issue should go right to the U.N and an international force should be authorized, a force that would include troops from Russia, China, India, Pakistan (and every other nation that's menaced by jihadists) along with Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia, western Europe and, okay, the U.S. Any world leader who thinks they have no stake in this fight should imagine what would happen if Mr. al-Baghdadi were to get his hands on a nuclear weapon (courtesy of Kim Jung-On perhaps). Is our U.N. ambassador doing anything at the moment?
235
Sorry, but I feel we have no stake in this fight. Please don't use the old what if they get a nuclear weapon routine. Been there, heard that, fought that war. Saudi Arabia beheads people all the time, do we fight them? This just is not our fight.
10
We created the madmen. So we have to fight them.
1
@rexl: Sorry but these folks are crazy enough to actually use a nuclear device if they managed to get a hold of one. They're not a genuine state and therefore not accountable to anyone. Furthermore, their leaders have an eschatological point of view that would commit them to hastening the end of the world if they were not to achieve their goals militarily. I'd sooner see Iran with a full-scale nuclear arsenal than a lunatic like al-Baghdadi with even one such weapon.
5