Friedman's last column, an appalling apologia for Saudi Arabia can not be squared with what he writes the very next week:
"And in October dozens of Saudi clerics called for a “holy war” against the governments of Syria, Iran and Russia."
The Saudi government is one of the biggest customers for our military hardware. We must tell their government, the younger of whose ministers was palling around with Friedman, that if they don't or can't control their clerical class stoking jihad, that we're going to cut them off. Not even a single bullet should we sell them until their people simply cut out material support for jihad and, especially, ISIS. We can and should do the same for all of the other gulf states doing the same. Not only must we cut them off from military materiel, but we should also make the American banking system unavailable to them. Then they can't buy mansions and Ferraris here, either. Let them live in the mess they made. Somehow, Friedman missed very vit of this.
"And in October dozens of Saudi clerics called for a “holy war” against the governments of Syria, Iran and Russia."
The Saudi government is one of the biggest customers for our military hardware. We must tell their government, the younger of whose ministers was palling around with Friedman, that if they don't or can't control their clerical class stoking jihad, that we're going to cut them off. Not even a single bullet should we sell them until their people simply cut out material support for jihad and, especially, ISIS. We can and should do the same for all of the other gulf states doing the same. Not only must we cut them off from military materiel, but we should also make the American banking system unavailable to them. Then they can't buy mansions and Ferraris here, either. Let them live in the mess they made. Somehow, Friedman missed very vit of this.
75
Defeat Daesh--and then what? Do sensible and effective national governments simply spring into existence where none have ever existed?
Deash isn't the problem but one of many symptoms of the problem, which is at bottom that the most severely water-stressed regions of the world, which are predominantly Muslim, are unraveling socially and politically. Nothing can stop this until some kind of new internal equilibrium is achieved, and the dabbling interference of outside powers can only delay that day. Either occupy and colonize the region, or stay out. Anything else is worse than futile.
Deash isn't the problem but one of many symptoms of the problem, which is at bottom that the most severely water-stressed regions of the world, which are predominantly Muslim, are unraveling socially and politically. Nothing can stop this until some kind of new internal equilibrium is achieved, and the dabbling interference of outside powers can only delay that day. Either occupy and colonize the region, or stay out. Anything else is worse than futile.
18
There are no moderate Muslims in Syria, no less a person than General Petraeus stated that clearly. There are Sunni terrorists sponsored by Gulf Arabs and helped by Turkey. Our best hope are the Kurds, the one group that has shown success and the one group the US refuses to arm
17
This is a problem with no solution, with some many Muslim countries involved there is going to be no real agreement, they will never live in peace and come back with increased demands.
I am willing to bet that 5 years from now we will be reading another column by Mr. Friedman with an even more complex issue than this involving the middle east.
I am willing to bet that 5 years from now we will be reading another column by Mr. Friedman with an even more complex issue than this involving the middle east.
5
Anyine who thinjs the premise of Russia entering Syria was principally to combat IS while the US tries to topple the Syrian government with "moderate" jihadis is clearly nauve, or dishonest.
13
Since the Turkish shoot down of a Russian fighter jet Mr. Putin has sent his SS-400 missile system into Syria, thus creating his own no-fly zone. It would be unwise to count him out at this time.
24
Impossible to win because our allies (Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Quatar) are financing and helping ISIL and we do nothing about it. According to President Obama a 93km/miles of Turkish boarder is open to them. Remember Kurds couldn't pass a single riffle to Kobani because Turkish army controls every inch . but that long stretch is left wide open. Also till I hear our admin puts some Saudis/Turks/Quataris on the black list for sending money or helping ISIL, I don't believe we are using all in our power to deminish ISIL.
53
This situation has devolved into a multi-sided sectarian war. Getting involved in a sectarian war is madness. Sectarian wars end only when people get tired of killing and being killed. Should we pick sides? Obviously, the only way to do that is on the basis of "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." But that reductio ad absurdum works only when you have one enemy. And there are lots of repulsive groups involved, each worse than the other!
40
The "Jihadist All Star Team" touted by Mr Friedman as some kind of grave threat to the entire world is a bunch of bozos. Thus far, their victims within the country identified by them as the Great Satan is...um...zero. And in the rest of the Western world, perhaps a few hundred folks, fewer than the number who die in car wrecks every day in this country.
Mr Friedman desperately wants us to be desperately afraid of these cretins. He is one of their best and most subtle tools.
Mr Friedman desperately wants us to be desperately afraid of these cretins. He is one of their best and most subtle tools.
14
Lucid and incisive as ever! Only one thing is missing - ISIS is not going to sit idle as the world powers plan potential strategies against them. As we saw in Paris, we are going to see more and more outrageous attacks which will make it very difficult for the western world to not start taking it out on their own Muslim citizens. And that is exactly what ISIS wants and in fact openly declares. To prevent such an outcome, the US and its allies, whether they see it or not, will have to deploy ground forces. We might see German army in action too for the first time since WW2! Obama cant wait to pass on the decision to order US forces again in Iraq to the new POTUS but events just might undo all his plans.
9
I'm surprised by Friedman's naiveté in this column. Putin couldn't care less about dead Russians or Assad. His two objectives are to stay in power and degrade the United States and NATO. As Friedman suggests in his own column, by propping up Assad, the situation has gone "strategic" as the EU is becoming more nationalistic and, hence, weaker. Putin needs to position Russia as surrounded by "enemies" in order to legitimize his own power. So we now not only have the Americans, Europeans and Ukrainians on the enemies list, we've just added the Turks! Look at the news reports in Russia: Turkey is now supporting ISIS! The long, sad history of Russia is one in which its people endure unending privations in order to prop-up Czars, Communists and now a Mafiosi masquerading as a president.
61
Two points about an unexpected unfocused ramble from Mr Friedman.
A-ISIS by joining into one fighting force both the ultra nationalist Baathists and Islamists is the incarnation of a long longed for alliance that many has come to considera necessary condition to face with the Judo/Christian Zionist/Imperialistic alliance.
That is how it will have to be and will be henceforward!
B-the Judo /Christian ultimate objective alliance in this anti ISIS war is the implementation of the Israeli inspired and USA adopted New Middle East strategic outlook that neither Iran nor others in the region necsessarily reject nor oppose.
A fact that goes a long way to explain the alliance's strange membership of diverse entities and states still at war with each other !
The New Middle East, being the ultimate objective of the J/C. Zionist/Imperialist, alliance is not , hitherto, shared by Russia that one would expect it to reject and oppose.
A-ISIS by joining into one fighting force both the ultra nationalist Baathists and Islamists is the incarnation of a long longed for alliance that many has come to considera necessary condition to face with the Judo/Christian Zionist/Imperialistic alliance.
That is how it will have to be and will be henceforward!
B-the Judo /Christian ultimate objective alliance in this anti ISIS war is the implementation of the Israeli inspired and USA adopted New Middle East strategic outlook that neither Iran nor others in the region necsessarily reject nor oppose.
A fact that goes a long way to explain the alliance's strange membership of diverse entities and states still at war with each other !
The New Middle East, being the ultimate objective of the J/C. Zionist/Imperialist, alliance is not , hitherto, shared by Russia that one would expect it to reject and oppose.
3
Friedman, Obama and Putin want to treat this like a political game, but I'd argue that genocide changes the moral equation when it comes to ISIS. We dither while ethnic and religious minorities are raped, enslaved and slaughtered by their de facto government.
Should we have waited out Nazi Germany?
Should we have waited out Nazi Germany?
4
Look... ask yourself one simple question. WHY DOES OBAMA WANT TO ANNIHILATE THE SYRIAN GOVERNMENT?
This is the question, and a very important question because this is affecting everyone back home. The cover story that Assad is an evil tyrant that enjoys watching the nails pulled off people is not the reason. Neither is it that Obama is jealous of Assad's wife, although i could see that point. The real reason is ~~~~ drum roll~~~~ because corporatist/financiers told him that that was the agenda.
Guess what...America does not have a constitutional republic or a democracy. America is a cleverly disguised PLUTOCRACY. How did it get that way? We got hijacked by people that were and are counterfeiting the money that we use. 88% of the money we use is created entirely by private commercial banks.
This is the question, and a very important question because this is affecting everyone back home. The cover story that Assad is an evil tyrant that enjoys watching the nails pulled off people is not the reason. Neither is it that Obama is jealous of Assad's wife, although i could see that point. The real reason is ~~~~ drum roll~~~~ because corporatist/financiers told him that that was the agenda.
Guess what...America does not have a constitutional republic or a democracy. America is a cleverly disguised PLUTOCRACY. How did it get that way? We got hijacked by people that were and are counterfeiting the money that we use. 88% of the money we use is created entirely by private commercial banks.
6
So sad to have watched Friedman go from a reasonable left-of-center public intellectual to an Obama, anti-Republican shill. A semblance of patriotic, pro-American rhetoric, compelling anti-terror language, professional treatment of Israel - even in the face of a cantankerous visage in the form of Netanyahu - THAT would give the public REASSURANCE that he can and would protect us, and give him the space to operate diplomatically with these issues. I am not even commenting on all of his policies which have been wrong and caused this mess - even if you side with the President's position on all of these issues, the President has not been "Presidential" in his leadership of ALL of the people. THAT is why we are fearful, we simply do not trust him to make a pro-American decision.
4
Mr. Friedman boldly stated:
"Sorry, but to sustainably defeat ISIS you need a mutually reinforcing coalition. You need Saudi Arabia and the leading Sunni religious powers to aggressively delegitimize ISIS’s Islamist narrative."
Sorry Mr. Friedman, to sustainably defeat ISIS you don’t need Saudi Arabia and the leading Sunni religious powers to aggressively delegitimize ISIS’s Islamism narrative.
You need somebody who understands the faith and the Koran MUCH BETTER THAN THE SAUDIS AND SUNNI RELIGIOUS POWERS.
Mr. Friedman, I personally offered you such a help thirteen years ago in a private email after you were a strong proponent of the Iraq War. I used Bulgaria as an accurate omen for quickly approaching Iraq War. You said that comparison was brilliant and that you might use it in your column.
In the next email I offered you really grim prediction of what would happened if we invaded Iraq. You didn’t like it at all and blocked my future emails.
The question is whether my predications were correct or not. It’s completely irrelevant whether you liked them or not at that moment.
If you continued conversation with me, I would have provided you with a way to undermine Al Qaeda’s theological and ideological appeal in a quick way.
Should I emphasize that if you helped me promote my ideas and the White House implemented those recommendations there would be no Iraq War, the al Qaeda would lose its recruiting power and there would be no ISIS at all?
"Sorry, but to sustainably defeat ISIS you need a mutually reinforcing coalition. You need Saudi Arabia and the leading Sunni religious powers to aggressively delegitimize ISIS’s Islamist narrative."
Sorry Mr. Friedman, to sustainably defeat ISIS you don’t need Saudi Arabia and the leading Sunni religious powers to aggressively delegitimize ISIS’s Islamism narrative.
You need somebody who understands the faith and the Koran MUCH BETTER THAN THE SAUDIS AND SUNNI RELIGIOUS POWERS.
Mr. Friedman, I personally offered you such a help thirteen years ago in a private email after you were a strong proponent of the Iraq War. I used Bulgaria as an accurate omen for quickly approaching Iraq War. You said that comparison was brilliant and that you might use it in your column.
In the next email I offered you really grim prediction of what would happened if we invaded Iraq. You didn’t like it at all and blocked my future emails.
The question is whether my predications were correct or not. It’s completely irrelevant whether you liked them or not at that moment.
If you continued conversation with me, I would have provided you with a way to undermine Al Qaeda’s theological and ideological appeal in a quick way.
Should I emphasize that if you helped me promote my ideas and the White House implemented those recommendations there would be no Iraq War, the al Qaeda would lose its recruiting power and there would be no ISIS at all?
5
Obama was wrong to refer to Daesh as the JV team but other than that his policy choices, given the options available, have been prudent and comprehensible.
Had we intervened near the beginning of the Syrian civil war, the US would surely have been tarnished with having made an awful carnage much worse by mounting a bombing campaign and actively supporting any of the combatants. At least this particular mess cannot be laid at our doorstep - if you ignore the direct connection between Daesh and the US invasion of Iraq in 2003. The conservative narrative lead by the likes of David Brooks that Obama stood by while a genocide occurred which could have been prevented is simply fantasy nonsense. Our early intervention would not have prevented what has transpired but we surely would have shared the blame for it.
Friedman's piece makes sense. The problem is the same one that has dogged us from the beginning - the impossibility of solving an insoluble crisis given the nature of the conflict and the principle players involved and their diverging interests.
Had we intervened near the beginning of the Syrian civil war, the US would surely have been tarnished with having made an awful carnage much worse by mounting a bombing campaign and actively supporting any of the combatants. At least this particular mess cannot be laid at our doorstep - if you ignore the direct connection between Daesh and the US invasion of Iraq in 2003. The conservative narrative lead by the likes of David Brooks that Obama stood by while a genocide occurred which could have been prevented is simply fantasy nonsense. Our early intervention would not have prevented what has transpired but we surely would have shared the blame for it.
Friedman's piece makes sense. The problem is the same one that has dogged us from the beginning - the impossibility of solving an insoluble crisis given the nature of the conflict and the principle players involved and their diverging interests.
11
Mr. Friedman, you say, "you need", "you need", "you need". I say, "We need" "The United States needs" to stop being involved in this civil war; stop working to overthrow the Syrian government of Assad; bring home all our troops, operatives, and contractors; stop our bombing; stop our drone killing; stop money and arms going to any government or group in the region.
19
For all the backseat quarterbacks, Obama handled this quagmire as well as possible within the parameters of an impossible situation.
That said, your scenario of all working together in probably the only conceivable way to possibly destroy ISIS. This is certainly not America's game alone nor should we be the starting quarterback, this must be a team effort including many Middle East nations as well.
That said, your scenario of all working together in probably the only conceivable way to possibly destroy ISIS. This is certainly not America's game alone nor should we be the starting quarterback, this must be a team effort including many Middle East nations as well.
11
The reality of the ISIS dilemma is that the fanatical Wahhabism religious converts to extremist Islamic jihadism exported from Saudi Arabia, is that they refuse to compromise as exemplified by their overt willingness to die by suicide bombings. This is much different than the Iranian exported Shiite extremism of organizations like Lebanon’s Hezbollah, Gaza's Hamas & Iraq’s Asaib Ahl al-Haq which still abide by cetain governmental policies of extremism management. Sunni extremist groups like Al Qaeda, ISIS, Taliban, Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) & Boko Haram are unique in that they want to overthrow governments. The Kurds are simply seeking territory that they believe is rightfully theirs after being oppressed for decades by Turkey, Iraq & Syria.
Therefore, depending on which camp one lies in there is little if any room for compromise. Radical religious zealotry, nationalist separatist ideology, income inequality, and territoriality & quest for wealth are all contributors to terrorism although most remarkably the religious component seems to be the underlying driver behind extremist acts. As witnessed by the US Planned Parenthood shootings, it doesn't take much beyond inflammatory rhetoric by political quasi religious figures to drive individuals to commit carnage in the name of religion. What is most needed to quell the spread of violent ideology is for political & religious leaders to use non-violent speech, condemn violence & stop the flow of money to terrorists.
Therefore, depending on which camp one lies in there is little if any room for compromise. Radical religious zealotry, nationalist separatist ideology, income inequality, and territoriality & quest for wealth are all contributors to terrorism although most remarkably the religious component seems to be the underlying driver behind extremist acts. As witnessed by the US Planned Parenthood shootings, it doesn't take much beyond inflammatory rhetoric by political quasi religious figures to drive individuals to commit carnage in the name of religion. What is most needed to quell the spread of violent ideology is for political & religious leaders to use non-violent speech, condemn violence & stop the flow of money to terrorists.
9
I had the same feeling you had when Putin decided to stick his nose into the
Syrian problem. When the plane was shot down my first thought was
"Welcome to the Middle East Mr. Putin".
Syrian problem. When the plane was shot down my first thought was
"Welcome to the Middle East Mr. Putin".
4
George W. Bush opened up the gates of hell and today we live in the wake of America's worst foreign policy mistake. None of the presidential contenders have proposed a solution that would not make this situation worse.
22
Russia is doing precisely what is necessary to save Syria from wildly violent sectarian insurgents, the very groups that have just taken responsibility for the destruction in Paris and Lebanon. Russia is working with the Syrian army to use air power to allow the army to gradually retake control of Syria.
Why that should be a problem for us I cannot understand in the least. We should have supported Russia from the beginning and should now.
Why that should be a problem for us I cannot understand in the least. We should have supported Russia from the beginning and should now.
26
Excellent piece from Mr. Friedman. One more thing that needs to be mentioned: those who are calling for the U.S. to expand its bombing campaign fail to note that ISIS forces are pretty well embedded in Sunni towns and communities in Iraq and Syria. I we bomb those areas we end up killing lots and lots of civilians. The more civilians we kill, the more likely their survivors will turn to ISIS and be radicalized themselves.
12
"Many of the anti-Assad rebels in that area are ethnic Turkmens, with strong cultural ties to Turkey; Turkey was not amused by Putin bombing Turkmen villages inside Syria, because it weakens Turkey’s ability to shape Syria’s future."
Friedman says...
...Well, the same logic is denied to Russia in Donbass and Crimea...
Friedman says...
...Well, the same logic is denied to Russia in Donbass and Crimea...
5
Why are we even still wallowing in this fetid quicksand?
Oh ya, that's right, we think quagmires are some kind of new and exotic drink, and therefore can't resist imbibing because that would require too much self-control.
Oh ya, that's right, we think quagmires are some kind of new and exotic drink, and therefore can't resist imbibing because that would require too much self-control.
1
“The only thing new in the world is the history you do not know,” said Harry S. Truman.
Not a great quote, perhaps, but accurate nonetheless. Whether it is Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq or Syria, the people of these countries do not want American or Russia or European nations to rule them. That is a historical fact. Putin and other "leaders" can ignore that fact, but at great cost.
Not a great quote, perhaps, but accurate nonetheless. Whether it is Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq or Syria, the people of these countries do not want American or Russia or European nations to rule them. That is a historical fact. Putin and other "leaders" can ignore that fact, but at great cost.
2
Nice propaganda piece Tom .Turkey is laundering oil for ISIS. Cut off the money and ISIS will collapse.The question to ask is why can't the greatest military ever assembled destroy ISIS oil infrastructure.Maybe they don't want too.
5
Iraq needs a President who will respond to Sunni disenfranchisement by issuing an Emancipation Proclamation, as Lincoln did.
1
A Gordian knot, made-up of selfish interests, religious intolerance, and our meddling in a region accustomed to a 'strong hand', so tribalisms can remain manageable, while huge inequalities remain, and based on the awful power of oil. Oil is what is keeping obscurantism in the Middle East, and women's slavery, and an arrogant dismissal of science, and a perverse interpretation of Islam that subjugates Muslims to live from crumbs...instead of a bastion of freedom, imagination, and the creation of a forward-thinking society, self-sufficient as it diversifies its potential, and talent, and tolerance. ISIS is but the latest insult to the Muslim community, violent, with no regard to humanity, sowing terror as it advances to its evil design (if any). That ISIS must be destroyed, no question. But unless there is a coordinated effort, especially of those being subjugated, and of those exporting Wahabism, and the international community, there is no relief in sight.
Ladies and gentlemen,
The domestic violence erupts because the villains are unable to understand, motivate, attract or cooperate with their spouses, so they opt out for a quick solution - beating them up and forcing to comply with their instructions by a brute force.
The same case is with the ISIS. The world leaders have launched the war against the terrorism more than 14 years ago, waged several wars and wasted several trillion dollars.
It‘s not that it takes time to fix the problems because the ISIS didn’t even exist in 2011. It has blossomed under the “careful” watch of leaders of America, Britain and France.
What is their solution to the problem? The wars or the bombs and after those methods have repeatedly failed, even more violence and brute force.
Why do they act in such a way? They wanted to look proactive, but didn’t know how to fix the problems and were ashamed of asking for a help by visiting “marriage counselor”.
The ISIS exists only because the Muslims in America, France, Britain, Turkey, Jordan or Saudi Arabia trusted al-Baghdadi more than our leaders. Our leaders have unfortunately lost the propaganda war and are trying to hide their failures with even more bombings.
I have been offering a simple way how to destroy al-Qaeda and ISIS theological and ideological appeal to our government, Presidents, intelligence services, State Department and media over the last 14 years but nobody ever replied to hundreds of emails...
The domestic violence erupts because the villains are unable to understand, motivate, attract or cooperate with their spouses, so they opt out for a quick solution - beating them up and forcing to comply with their instructions by a brute force.
The same case is with the ISIS. The world leaders have launched the war against the terrorism more than 14 years ago, waged several wars and wasted several trillion dollars.
It‘s not that it takes time to fix the problems because the ISIS didn’t even exist in 2011. It has blossomed under the “careful” watch of leaders of America, Britain and France.
What is their solution to the problem? The wars or the bombs and after those methods have repeatedly failed, even more violence and brute force.
Why do they act in such a way? They wanted to look proactive, but didn’t know how to fix the problems and were ashamed of asking for a help by visiting “marriage counselor”.
The ISIS exists only because the Muslims in America, France, Britain, Turkey, Jordan or Saudi Arabia trusted al-Baghdadi more than our leaders. Our leaders have unfortunately lost the propaganda war and are trying to hide their failures with even more bombings.
I have been offering a simple way how to destroy al-Qaeda and ISIS theological and ideological appeal to our government, Presidents, intelligence services, State Department and media over the last 14 years but nobody ever replied to hundreds of emails...
There is one former event to compare with IS (Islamic State)in order to understand the graveness of the situation. In the 1930's an ex autrian corporal led millions of europeans into WW2 in order to create a GS (German State) by means of invading and destroying its intended victims. The recipe then was very much today's cooking: attack its enemy psichologically and physically so that terror would make them vulnerable. (Well, that apart of the flags and uniforms and the promised land...)
Let's give credit where credit is due and not constantly fall back on the new cold war mentality. Russia has done more in two months to degrade terrorist groups in Syria than the US has done in over a year. The only groups left fighting the Assad regime with success are Sunni Muslim jihadists and Russia is targeting all those groups. Please reference "In the Syrian Deadlands", in the NYRB from Oct 22, 2015. Assad's regime has committed multitudes of atrocities, no doubt. But can any rational person be in favor of the alternative, which let's be clear is not some pie-in-the-sky, Free Syrian Army democratic takeover of power.
7
"You need Saudi Arabia and the leading Sunni religious powers to aggressively delegitimize ISIS’s Islamist narrative."
Hard to imagine this happening as it would also delegitimize the Wahabi narrative in and emanating from Saudi Arabia. This would unravel the unholy alliance between the ruling family and the Saudi religious elite, leading to . . . . who knows what.
Hard to imagine this happening as it would also delegitimize the Wahabi narrative in and emanating from Saudi Arabia. This would unravel the unholy alliance between the ruling family and the Saudi religious elite, leading to . . . . who knows what.
4
The reason those on the chicken-hawkish right of the Replutocrats thought Putin's actions "crafty" is because they were brutish, bullying and nasty. To those chicken-hawks, the "strategy" which they say Obama's policies lack always, always, always means it's time to go in and beat someone up, long-term unintended consequences be d*mned.
8
Safe column, as usual. For backbone and moral clarity in addition to appreciation of the complexity of all the elements involved I refer the reader to Friedman's colleague Roger Cohen.
8
Jawboning, divisiveness, derogation of 'others', and Monday morning quarterbacking are the pillars of right wing credibility. The actual 'doing' of anything leaves them vulnerable to the fallacies of their delusions, and the self serving reality of their underlying intent.
5
"You need Saudi Arabia and the leading Sunni religious powers to aggressively delegitimize ISIS’s Islamist narrative. You need Arab, Kurdish and Turkish ground troops — backed by U.S. and NATO air power and special forces, with Russia’s constructive support — to uproot ISIS door to door."
Still no word on the effectiveness of any Russian bombing of the ISIS oil route into Turkey, or on the Russian accusations of Turkish complicity. Or on the inability of the USAF to cut off this route after a year. I thought "nothing could stop the USAF". Maybe the Russians are lying.
Otherwise Mr. Friedman has mapped the route to Utopia. More imperialist intervention from all sides only not only makes the situation worse for the people of the Middle East, but encourages the inactivity of Friedman's proposed regional agents. And perhaps if the US/UK stopped giving active logistical support to the wrong war facing the wrong direction (Yemen), that might get the attention of the Saudis and UAE
Still no word on the effectiveness of any Russian bombing of the ISIS oil route into Turkey, or on the Russian accusations of Turkish complicity. Or on the inability of the USAF to cut off this route after a year. I thought "nothing could stop the USAF". Maybe the Russians are lying.
Otherwise Mr. Friedman has mapped the route to Utopia. More imperialist intervention from all sides only not only makes the situation worse for the people of the Middle East, but encourages the inactivity of Friedman's proposed regional agents. And perhaps if the US/UK stopped giving active logistical support to the wrong war facing the wrong direction (Yemen), that might get the attention of the Saudis and UAE
4
Just stop buying ISIS cheap oil (intelligence knows who or not?!!!) and the war is over....
1
If all the jihadists could be killed today, there would be more tomorrow. Why? The answers to THAT question have to be addressed and the time is now. Otherwise, we're just spinning our wheels, getting nowhere.
6
I don't know whether President Obama thought Isis to be the JV team or was just doing his best to tone down rhetoric to play a long game without pressures for a precipitous and disastrous intervention. Where I disagree with Mr. Friedman is on his view of the moderate/radical Sunni divide. I'm less and less convinced that there is, in the heart of the Middle East, a moderate Sunni core that we can build upon. Secular Sunnis were on top in Iraq and we toppled them. In Syria, I suspect that many were satisfied enough with Assad keeping the lid on things. Mr. Friedman and American elites may enjoy their stays in Dubai or Doha, but I see little or nothing to trust in the role of the Saudis and Gulf states. Change within the Muslim world may have to come from the peripheries, e.g., Morocco, Tunisia, Muslim communities in the West, or Indonesia -- a place where the Times recently reported on efforts to promote an alternative to Saudi radicalism. This will take time, and during that time, it will cost innocent lives, but getting us deeper into the vortex of the Middle East will only end up strengthening one or another radical Sunni group.
12
Putin has obviously stepped in a smoldering pile of poo. Despite the adoring admiration of our own republicans (who are rarely right about anything), many more sensible people knew Putin would regret getting militarily involved in Syria. If he isn't already looking for a face-saving exit, he should be. We Americans should be thankful that Obama has the good sense to steer clear of that mess.
12
"We Americans should be thankful that Obama has the good sense to steer clear of that mess."
NOV. 15, 2012
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/16/opinion/the-worlds-next-genocide.html
"... pro-democracy protests degenerated into civil war, the ideological composition of the opposition changed...
...inside Syria those chanting “Christians to Beirut, Alawites to their graves!” have become more than a fringe element..."
"...The city of Homs was once home to 80,000 Christians; there are now reportedly fewer than 400..."
NOV. 15, 2012
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/16/opinion/the-worlds-next-genocide.html
"... pro-democracy protests degenerated into civil war, the ideological composition of the opposition changed...
...inside Syria those chanting “Christians to Beirut, Alawites to their graves!” have become more than a fringe element..."
"...The city of Homs was once home to 80,000 Christians; there are now reportedly fewer than 400..."
I do not see Russia doing anything worse than the U.S. and it could be argued that they have a better plan the U.S. The majority of Syrians want the stability of the Assad regime. As Friedman has pointed out in other articles that even under a bad dictator as least a person can set up shop and count on a pretty normal tomorrow.
The best thing we could do is leave the region, I think we have a made a big enough mess. Syria is a Russian ally, let Russia take the lead on this one. It should occupy them for at least a couple decades or so. A couple decades where we might be able to invest in something other than our failed mid-east policies.
The best thing we could do is leave the region, I think we have a made a big enough mess. Syria is a Russian ally, let Russia take the lead on this one. It should occupy them for at least a couple decades or so. A couple decades where we might be able to invest in something other than our failed mid-east policies.
14
Indeed, the conflicts in Iraq and Syria show how stubborn and self-centred all the key players in the region are. They all want the status quo ante and pretend the Arab Spring had never happened.
It's also true that "most of the real democrats in that region are living abroad." In August 2011 the world focused its attention on the newly formed Syrian National Council. There was much excitement when the SNC announced the end of Assad's rule and the establishment of a modern, civil, democratic state. Its charter listed human rights, judicial independence, press freedom, democracy and political pluralism as its guiding principles. The SNC was made up of Syrian expats living - mostly - in the West. Its members were criticised for their constant bickering and their penchant to stay in 5-star hotels during meetings. They were also rejected by the rebel groups and others in Syria, because they are seen as aloof.
Much had gone wrong right from the start of the Syrian war, and the civilians have to bear the brunt of this power struggle among regional key players.
It's also true that "most of the real democrats in that region are living abroad." In August 2011 the world focused its attention on the newly formed Syrian National Council. There was much excitement when the SNC announced the end of Assad's rule and the establishment of a modern, civil, democratic state. Its charter listed human rights, judicial independence, press freedom, democracy and political pluralism as its guiding principles. The SNC was made up of Syrian expats living - mostly - in the West. Its members were criticised for their constant bickering and their penchant to stay in 5-star hotels during meetings. They were also rejected by the rebel groups and others in Syria, because they are seen as aloof.
Much had gone wrong right from the start of the Syrian war, and the civilians have to bear the brunt of this power struggle among regional key players.
1
When Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Pakistan, now Turkey are someone's best friends (BFF) they are not fighting terrorism, they are supporting it. To claim otherwise destroys the countries or article writers credibility across the board not limited to this subject.
14
If success against Daesh calls for Saudi involvement that is meaningful and not strictly self-serving, it just ain't gonna happen. They are a huge catalyst for the unrest in the region.
14
Friedman seems to have a lot of respect for the ME despots and he's proudly showing it. Perhaps he should attend the upcoming Saudi attraction: the beheading (or is it crucifying?) of some 50+ opponents of Saudi's autocracy.
5
Obama has not handled this badly. He has handled it disastrously.
In 2012, there was no ISIS and al-Qaeda had been quelled in Iraq. Just two years later, under Obama, ISIS had established a state with a capital in Raqqa, established a court system, established an army, and taken over Mosul (2.5 million people) among many other cities.
ISIS then used that safe haven to plan and launch attacks that resulted in hundreds of dead Parisian and Russian civilians. It would have been much much easier for a couple hundreds US spec op troops to defend Mosul, than it will be for anyone to take it back now that ISIS has been entrenched there for years.
The results are horrible, and the buck stops with Obama. Now that the JV team has had years to recruit and plan in a safe haven, I am expecting a subway/concert attack in Manhattan. Hopefully I am wrong, but if it happens, it will be on Obama.
In 2012, there was no ISIS and al-Qaeda had been quelled in Iraq. Just two years later, under Obama, ISIS had established a state with a capital in Raqqa, established a court system, established an army, and taken over Mosul (2.5 million people) among many other cities.
ISIS then used that safe haven to plan and launch attacks that resulted in hundreds of dead Parisian and Russian civilians. It would have been much much easier for a couple hundreds US spec op troops to defend Mosul, than it will be for anyone to take it back now that ISIS has been entrenched there for years.
The results are horrible, and the buck stops with Obama. Now that the JV team has had years to recruit and plan in a safe haven, I am expecting a subway/concert attack in Manhattan. Hopefully I am wrong, but if it happens, it will be on Obama.
3
And if it doesn't happen will that ALSO be on Obama? Be advised that we pulled our troops from Iraq for two reasons: Americans were no longer interested in seeing their sons and daughters come home from the Middle East in body bags. Also, the Iraqis wanted us out (especially the Shiite militias who threatened to attack our troops if we stayed). Had we remained there, we would have done so in defiance of their government and become an army of occupation.
You are revising history. Al queda had never been quelled. They were doing what guerrila fightesr do, They appear and disappear. To think they were quelled is very naive. ISIS is just a split off of al queda led by fomrer Saddam soldiers. Bush created that situation by disbanding them with their guns but giving them no voice in the government or means of support.
ISIS will fail unless we give them recruiting material. Obama has made some mistakes like getting involved in Syria but they aren't nearly as disastrous as the George W Bush mistakes or the mistakes the republican field wants to make.
ISIS will fail unless we give them recruiting material. Obama has made some mistakes like getting involved in Syria but they aren't nearly as disastrous as the George W Bush mistakes or the mistakes the republican field wants to make.
Ray, you haven't read history books, apparently.
Even the most cockeyed optimist would have no hope of a coalition to deal with ISIS. Every major player has a different agenda, different ambitions. Putin's "misadventure" as Friedman calls it, has cost lives, and even though he shares a common enemy (ISIS) with most nations, his steadfast support of the murderous Assad keeps him at odds with those who view Assad as lethal as ISIS. The elephant in the room is Israel, which, remarkably, has been relatively quiet in the midst of this fiasco. Once ISIS turns its attention to Israel and launches the kind of mayhem it did in Paris, no coalition will be necessary. Israel will solve the problem with Putin and Obama remaining in the background.
You forget Israel's last foray into Lebanon. It wans't good. Israel is wise to stay out of this.
1
The Obama administration's response in Syria is arguably the worst of all possible worlds. Either we go all-in and genuinely try to eradicate ISIS and Assad, admittedly a tall and possibly unachievable order (remember Iraq ?), or we stay out. Bombing from the air, let alone, collateral damage prone drone strikes will never accomplish the goal and leave us in this vulnerable half-way road to nowhere. The fact the Turks, the Jordanians, Saudis, and Egyptians wont intervene on the ground (and the Turks possibly supporting the wrong side to weaken the kurds and encouraging the refugee flood to Europe for leverage) was and remains ominous.
I would prefer inaction to current actions.
I would prefer inaction to current actions.
3
That makes no sense. All in or nothing? The world is more complicated than that, and no place is more complicated than Syria. We tried training the opposition but that failed miserably. Now a strategy to weaken ISIS from the air but limit the risk to our own people is the only prudent path. Getting more deeply involved in a thousand year old religious war and multi-sided political struggle would be very foolish. The belligerents themselves are to blame and they need to find a way to end it.
I don't view Russia's moves as being any worse than anyone else's. They are trying to save an ally that everyone else wants to destroy. I velieve ISIS is a JV team and will fail. Look at the article on the Times front page about their difficulties. Are you equally critical of France because they had a terrible ISIS incident? We are upset with Russia because they won't play by our rules but they clearly have their own interests in the area. Obama is wise enough not to feed the ISIS propaganda machine by making us the devil.ISIS is trying hard to make us over react. Let's not do it.
We also have to stop the funding coming from Saudi Arabia and unclassify the 28 pages in the congressional 9/11 report that detail Saudi Arabia's rold. ISIS funding is drying up and we need to keep it dry.
We also have to stop the funding coming from Saudi Arabia and unclassify the 28 pages in the congressional 9/11 report that detail Saudi Arabia's rold. ISIS funding is drying up and we need to keep it dry.
5
Strange isn't it? We, the American public can't see those 28 pages in the Congressional 9/11 report (which was white washing of Bush incompetence, anyway) just like the Chicago Police Department and Chicago politicians didn't want us to see the murder of Laquan McDonald.
Yes, it was a mistake to label ISIS as Jr. Varsity, just like it was a mistake for Bush to call al Qaeda small potatoes. One penetrated our domesticity, the other wishes to. Both are threats to our peace and tranquility.
But until we admit that our true enemy is in Saudi Arabia we are destined to fail. All Saudis are not our enemy, but then neither were all Germans in the 1940's. The ones most responsible for ISIS and al Qaeda successes are among the ultra-wealthy Saudis. No doubt, some are even members of the royal family.
Let's stop financing the jihadists. Start by imposing an embargo on Saudi oil. If you are hellbent on bombing something, bomb Saudi pipelines, pumping stations and loading docks. Make it look like ISIS was the responsible culprit. If they insist we were responsible for the bombing, let them try to stop us.
If anyone wants this mess in the Middle East to end quickly, that's the only way it's gonna happen. Otherwise, we are in for an existential war that will rage on for decades. Either way, we must finally acknowledge that we are indirectly funding all Islamic terrorists via Saudi money and influence. Still, it seems we are unable, or unwilling, to pull our heads out of the sand. (accidentally appropriate)
But until we admit that our true enemy is in Saudi Arabia we are destined to fail. All Saudis are not our enemy, but then neither were all Germans in the 1940's. The ones most responsible for ISIS and al Qaeda successes are among the ultra-wealthy Saudis. No doubt, some are even members of the royal family.
Let's stop financing the jihadists. Start by imposing an embargo on Saudi oil. If you are hellbent on bombing something, bomb Saudi pipelines, pumping stations and loading docks. Make it look like ISIS was the responsible culprit. If they insist we were responsible for the bombing, let them try to stop us.
If anyone wants this mess in the Middle East to end quickly, that's the only way it's gonna happen. Otherwise, we are in for an existential war that will rage on for decades. Either way, we must finally acknowledge that we are indirectly funding all Islamic terrorists via Saudi money and influence. Still, it seems we are unable, or unwilling, to pull our heads out of the sand. (accidentally appropriate)
2
Ladies and gentlemen,
The world leaders are incompetent of fighting against the ISIS. Their words are completely irrelevant. Their deeds talk thousand times louder than their proclamations.
It’s impossible to defeat the ISIS as long as the modern precedent exists and is supported by the world powers and the UN.
The ISIS didn’t invent the concept of ethnic and religious cleansing. It has been reinvented and implemented during the war in Bosnia in 1992, almost a quarter of century ago. Those who committed the terrible crimes have eventually been internationally recognized and rewarded by a hefty prize.
Exactly here in America, in our very own military base in Dayton, Ohio, the practices currently being implemented by the ISIS had been officially recognized and rewarded by creation of entity “Republic Srpska” on the huge chunk of territory in Bosnia, after the whole world witnessed the mass killings, rapes, concentration camps and expulsion of the people from their homes without any chance of return.
If you believe than any refugee that ran away from the ISIS killers might return to their homes in entity called “Islamic Republic” after the only legal punishment was sentencing the leaders like al-Baghdadi up to twenty years of comfortable open-style-prison confinement, then you don’t understand the terrorists and the refugees.
Have you checked how many refugees returned to their homes in “Republic Srpska”?
The world leaders are incompetent of fighting against the ISIS. Their words are completely irrelevant. Their deeds talk thousand times louder than their proclamations.
It’s impossible to defeat the ISIS as long as the modern precedent exists and is supported by the world powers and the UN.
The ISIS didn’t invent the concept of ethnic and religious cleansing. It has been reinvented and implemented during the war in Bosnia in 1992, almost a quarter of century ago. Those who committed the terrible crimes have eventually been internationally recognized and rewarded by a hefty prize.
Exactly here in America, in our very own military base in Dayton, Ohio, the practices currently being implemented by the ISIS had been officially recognized and rewarded by creation of entity “Republic Srpska” on the huge chunk of territory in Bosnia, after the whole world witnessed the mass killings, rapes, concentration camps and expulsion of the people from their homes without any chance of return.
If you believe than any refugee that ran away from the ISIS killers might return to their homes in entity called “Islamic Republic” after the only legal punishment was sentencing the leaders like al-Baghdadi up to twenty years of comfortable open-style-prison confinement, then you don’t understand the terrorists and the refugees.
Have you checked how many refugees returned to their homes in “Republic Srpska”?
1
The situation is terribly complex. However, the article is 'spot on' that the countries in the region are the ones that need to defeat these neo-nazis. However, the fault is not that Obama does not want to commit ground troops, but that he has not taken on a leadership position, as George Herbert Walker Bush did in the first Iraqi war. Obama simply has no leadership capabilities, and has left a vacuum in that area.
We need a president who will lead and not follow as Obama has done. All his inspiring rhetoric and proclamations that we "will defeat ISIL" is nothing but flatulence, that disappears when we see how in reality it means nothing.
We need a president who will lead and not follow as Obama has done. All his inspiring rhetoric and proclamations that we "will defeat ISIL" is nothing but flatulence, that disappears when we see how in reality it means nothing.
I for one am glad Obama recognizes that the US and its taxpayers cannot police the world. I am glad an American president finally recognizes that the other nations of the world, from Europe to the Middle East and Asia, have to learn to protect their own interests with the US doing the hard work and footing the bill.
2
That's right, the usually Friedman-branded stream of shallow platitudes inside a shell of grand and impenetrable pomposity, screaming "I am relevant and I know what I am talking about".
by the way, the so-called sunni-shia civil war is nothing but the invention and the instigation of government propaganda peons such as Friedman and, of couse, of the governments they serve. It didn't happen until 'we' said it was happening and started pouring 'aid' (i.e. deadly weapons and training) into the various local despoties on the condition that they threaten each other, therefore the need of more 'aid' and training.
And I seem to detect a little bit of pique in Friedman's piece. He seems to be a worshipper of the 'we are the indispensable nation' cult and, of course, nobody can possibly succeed or advance where 'we' failed and retreated.
by the way, the so-called sunni-shia civil war is nothing but the invention and the instigation of government propaganda peons such as Friedman and, of couse, of the governments they serve. It didn't happen until 'we' said it was happening and started pouring 'aid' (i.e. deadly weapons and training) into the various local despoties on the condition that they threaten each other, therefore the need of more 'aid' and training.
And I seem to detect a little bit of pique in Friedman's piece. He seems to be a worshipper of the 'we are the indispensable nation' cult and, of course, nobody can possibly succeed or advance where 'we' failed and retreated.
6
"Sorry, but to sustainably defeat ISIS you need a mutually reinforcing coalition. You need Saudi Arabia and the leading Sunni religious powers to aggressively delegitimize ISIS’s Islamist narrative."
Is this a joke, Mr. Friedman?!
Saudi Arabia and the leading Sunni religious powers including Turkey were driving forces to fuel Syrian civil war. This is what VP Biden said a year ago - 2 October 2014:
-- Vice President Biden Remarks on Foreign Policy --
«The Turks were great friends – and I have the greatest relationship with Erdogan, which I just spent a lot of time with – the Saudis, the Emirates, etc. What were they doing? They were so determined to take down Assad and essentially have a proxy Sunni-Shia war, what did they do? They poured hundreds of millions of dollars and tens, thousands of tons of weapons into anyone who would fight against Assad except that the people who were being supplied were Al Nusra and Al Qaeda and the extremist elements of jihadists coming from other parts of the world."
Is this a joke, Mr. Friedman?!
Saudi Arabia and the leading Sunni religious powers including Turkey were driving forces to fuel Syrian civil war. This is what VP Biden said a year ago - 2 October 2014:
-- Vice President Biden Remarks on Foreign Policy --
«The Turks were great friends – and I have the greatest relationship with Erdogan, which I just spent a lot of time with – the Saudis, the Emirates, etc. What were they doing? They were so determined to take down Assad and essentially have a proxy Sunni-Shia war, what did they do? They poured hundreds of millions of dollars and tens, thousands of tons of weapons into anyone who would fight against Assad except that the people who were being supplied were Al Nusra and Al Qaeda and the extremist elements of jihadists coming from other parts of the world."
6
It's a difficult situation, politically and ethically. The glaring white elephant or rather two elephants in this conflict: Saudi Arabia and the Middle East's borders. At some point Saudi will need to be held accountable for it's long term role in that region. That is politically difficult due to our current reliance on oil exports and need for allies there. I wonder if US' domestic oil production will allow us to completely break our dependence on them? That'll give a much needed leverage to lean on the Saudis.
The Middle East borders stemming from Ottoman Empire's breakup crammed antagonistic groups together and like-minded groups divided into different countries. Would it help to achieve long-lasting peace and stability if the map is redrawn?
The Middle East borders stemming from Ottoman Empire's breakup crammed antagonistic groups together and like-minded groups divided into different countries. Would it help to achieve long-lasting peace and stability if the map is redrawn?
2
It seems, nobody wants to fight this war after Iraq and Afganistan debacle. This war will also not have clear goals. Nobody is sure what each affected country wants so there is no credible alliance and ownership post war.
Any country who wants to see ISIS defeated will have to fight declared war and be ready to rule it subsequently till democracy is established. It took British more than 100 years to it in Indian subcontinent.
If USA does it, it will again established itself as super power and champion of democracy.
Any country who wants to see ISIS defeated will have to fight declared war and be ready to rule it subsequently till democracy is established. It took British more than 100 years to it in Indian subcontinent.
If USA does it, it will again established itself as super power and champion of democracy.
1
The entire Middle East needs a new approach, perhaps with the methodology of a 'Pace Romana' a forced peace in the style of the ancient Roman Empire. Apart from the underlying aspirations of the many groups and the western supported authocracies, I focus here on this: poverty begets religion, and religion begets more poverty and violence. History teaches that we are in a deadly cycle that cannot stop on its own for centuries.
The Middle East needs systematic apeasement by a world coalition, perhaps first with the creation of a Kurdish state and the expansion of Turkey and Iran (as an uncomfortable middle step). The rest of most of the Arab world and the other destabilized countries in North Africa plus Pakistan need to be militarily occupied, de-religionized (yes, by outlawing anything other than the most moderates), secularized, re-educated (yes, de-brainwashed), and economically developed from the ground up. A new administration and military will provide good career opportunities for moderates and seculars.
Cycle of apeacement:
boots on one ground - drive radicals out - boots on their new ground
Bringing democracy to the Middle East will foster theocracies for another generation after a forced peace. The ulterior goal must be to rid the world of all forms of theocracies and autocrats.
Without a systematic approach, the intellectual foundation of ISIS (not ISIS itself) is already threatening our entire civilization.
A.J. Deus
Social Economics of Religious Terrorism
The Middle East needs systematic apeasement by a world coalition, perhaps first with the creation of a Kurdish state and the expansion of Turkey and Iran (as an uncomfortable middle step). The rest of most of the Arab world and the other destabilized countries in North Africa plus Pakistan need to be militarily occupied, de-religionized (yes, by outlawing anything other than the most moderates), secularized, re-educated (yes, de-brainwashed), and economically developed from the ground up. A new administration and military will provide good career opportunities for moderates and seculars.
Cycle of apeacement:
boots on one ground - drive radicals out - boots on their new ground
Bringing democracy to the Middle East will foster theocracies for another generation after a forced peace. The ulterior goal must be to rid the world of all forms of theocracies and autocrats.
Without a systematic approach, the intellectual foundation of ISIS (not ISIS itself) is already threatening our entire civilization.
A.J. Deus
Social Economics of Religious Terrorism
1
The premise is that an outright defeat of ISIS is a good thing, just like an outright defeat of Saddam was thought to be a good idea before it happened. What if a total defeat of ISIS turned out to be as bad of an idea as getting rid of Saddam Hussein? What if instead of defeating ISIS we focused on starving them of the resources needed to arm, equip and pay their fighters. All the while we continue to harass them from the air, and focus on protecting the homeland. I for one believe that ISIS helps to keep our CIA, FBI, etc. on their toes here at home, and that is not all bad.
The Middle East was carved up 100 years ago by the British who either didn't understand or give recognition to the different sects that have been at odds with each other for a thousand years or more. They established political leaders who became dictators and than the region discovered oil. Along came the USA which morfed into a super power after WW11 and we tiptoed into this mess long before W because we saw the opportunity to Democratize the region and at the same time take advantage of the accessibility to oil. After many years, our uninformed and uneducated electorate created a very close presidential election in 2000 which was awarded to W by his brother and SCOTUS .However, someone didn't get the memo so President Cheney decided that his former "employer", Halliburton could make huge profits(unfortunately Cheney divested???) so they decided to attack Iraq which had nothing to do with 9/11 and the GOP is still looking for WMD. These events gave birth to almost everything that is wrong in the USA and the rest of the world today, but thank God that "climate change" is a hoax. I wish that all of the above was just another fable but if you want to know who is really responsible, look in the mirror.
There is only one rational and realistic policy that can be followed in the Middle East at the present time. Protect Israel's security and encourage Palestinians to make a peace with it. Everything else ought to be viewed as secondary.
2
For this to take place, the Israeli government and ruling interests will also have to desire peace. At present, there's absolutely no evidence that the do. Quite the contrary.
2
Regarding Friedman's article, Putin's Syrian Adventure, it should be pointed out, that out of sheer benevolent motifs, President Obama made a great error in his inaugural speech to Congress. He said we should not look backwards (to the errors that were made during the Bush Administration). He avoided mentioning that the United States was involved through the machinations of the Bush Administrations in an unprovoked lengthy war in Iraq with heavy losses in manpower and treasure. As a result Republicans in Congress feel entitled to criticize President Obama for not renewing the war in Iraq, for which President Bush signed a withdrawal treaty. If we go in with a massive new campaign they will be the first to try to tear down the Administration's new war effort. And now Friedman writes Obama "has done an impossible job badly."
1
Fresh from his luxury honeymoon in Saudi Arabia, Mr. Friedman is on his way to become the regular mouthpiece of Saudi Arabia, which of course is unhappy with Putin's intervention in Turkey, which has showed the true colors of our sunny ME allies, who are cleverly taking our money while also helping, abetting and fostering ISIS.
I never thought I'll say this, but thank goodness for Putin's tough stance on Turkey and his help with ISIS.
Mr. Friedman with all due respect, are you aware that you are losing your hard won credibility for a fist of Saudi dollars?
Are you reading the Guardian lately? I suggest this title:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/24/vladimir-putin-turkey-isis-...
Please drop being or acting so painfully naive. The enemy is trojan horsed into our staunchest ME allies.
Turkey is playing a brilliant game offering the EU a lose-lose: either pay Turkey billions and force hand EU to get Turkey in NATO, although geographically, religiously and culturally is in Asia (Erdagan's wife had her head covered when he delivered the speech after taking down the Russian bomb; showing us the true cultural colors of 'modern' Turkey; or get the same billions frm the SAUDIs and ISIS oil and colonize the EU with Muslim refugees, in other words, take EU through the back door.
The only man wide awake here is PUTIN. Sorry.
I never thought I'll say this, but thank goodness for Putin's tough stance on Turkey and his help with ISIS.
Mr. Friedman with all due respect, are you aware that you are losing your hard won credibility for a fist of Saudi dollars?
Are you reading the Guardian lately? I suggest this title:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/24/vladimir-putin-turkey-isis-...
Please drop being or acting so painfully naive. The enemy is trojan horsed into our staunchest ME allies.
Turkey is playing a brilliant game offering the EU a lose-lose: either pay Turkey billions and force hand EU to get Turkey in NATO, although geographically, religiously and culturally is in Asia (Erdagan's wife had her head covered when he delivered the speech after taking down the Russian bomb; showing us the true cultural colors of 'modern' Turkey; or get the same billions frm the SAUDIs and ISIS oil and colonize the EU with Muslim refugees, in other words, take EU through the back door.
The only man wide awake here is PUTIN. Sorry.
4
If it is an impossible job (for now anyway), minimum involvement without walking away totally is the best one can do, which is what President Obama has tried to do.
One should not confuse Trump to be a neocon though. His approach is reality-free bravado. This is worse than "mission accomplished."
Putin thought everything was neat and tidy like Ukraine but the hornet nest otherwise known as Middle East has plenty of oil. Cutting off any natural gas supplies is not an option. Quite on the contrary, Russia depends on the pipeline access for the much needed hard currency.
So what now? Let's hope self-interest prevails. No one, not even China, wants terrorism to be imported to one's own backyard. So, ISIL is the common enemy. And Assad is the biggest recruiting agent. So, before one dreams up artificial devices like "Sunnistan," which the whole Middle East has become so long ago, it is in everyone's self-interest to eliminate ISIL and Assad in one fell scoop
One should not confuse Trump to be a neocon though. His approach is reality-free bravado. This is worse than "mission accomplished."
Putin thought everything was neat and tidy like Ukraine but the hornet nest otherwise known as Middle East has plenty of oil. Cutting off any natural gas supplies is not an option. Quite on the contrary, Russia depends on the pipeline access for the much needed hard currency.
So what now? Let's hope self-interest prevails. No one, not even China, wants terrorism to be imported to one's own backyard. So, ISIL is the common enemy. And Assad is the biggest recruiting agent. So, before one dreams up artificial devices like "Sunnistan," which the whole Middle East has become so long ago, it is in everyone's self-interest to eliminate ISIL and Assad in one fell scoop
Mr. Putin's goodwill toward Syria had nothing to do with ISIS, and could basically be summed up in two words: 'Assad' and 'Tartus', because his affection for the beleaguered Syrian dictator stretches only as far as the Russian naval base at Tartus. Anyone thinking that his involvement would be less militaristic, would have have had a rude awakening. So now, we have three hotheads on the head of the pin, if you include Mr. Erdogan of Turkey.
Where this will all lead to is anyone's guess, just hopefully not another victory for ISIS at the cost of the Syrian people.
Where this will all lead to is anyone's guess, just hopefully not another victory for ISIS at the cost of the Syrian people.
1
As harshly truthful as Friedman might be about Obama's success to date, the most painful part is that Barack Hussein Obama II is the only President we have had in my lifetime that actually has the background, intelligence, mind-set, and analytical software capable of solving Friedman's global Rubik's Cube. I am still pulling for Obama's measured wisdom to yet find that "mutually reinforcing coalition," finally use our unspent political capital with the Saudis, and new our new leverage with the Iranians, to come up with a silver bullet. I like "Sunnistan!"
3
"You need Iran to encourage the Shiite-led government in Baghdad to create a semiautonomous “Sunnistan” in the areas held by ISIS, giving moderate Iraqi Sunnis the same devolved powers as Kurds in Kurdistan...
How funny, Friedman has finally caught up to what Biden said years ago.
How funny, Friedman has finally caught up to what Biden said years ago.
2
Mr. Friedman presents a long list of hand-wringing "you need"s, but it doesn't look like any of them are going to happen soon. The obvious need has always been missing from these conversations: a military alliance between Saudi Arabia and Israel. Such an alliance could have easily controlled the Syrian situation years ago, but it is never considered, never even mentioned. It's another "need" that isn't going to happen. As politics go in the Middle East, Israeli and Saudi military conversations have probably been going on secretly for a long time. Mr. Friedman: you need to discuss it.
1
This brings us right back to what Sen. Joe Biden said at the outset of the Iraqi invasion: that what was needed was three clearly divided entities in Iraq for the Sunni, Shia'a and the Kurds.
Iraq is a construction of the French and English (Sykes-Picot Agreement) and took no notice of the traditional lands of the various tribes in the Middle East. They've been fighting with each other ever since World War I.
Iraq is a construction of the French and English (Sykes-Picot Agreement) and took no notice of the traditional lands of the various tribes in the Middle East. They've been fighting with each other ever since World War I.
2
Only at the end of this piece does Thomas Friedman touch upon the Kurds, a people who have been "granted" some level of autonomy within Iraq, but not the status of nationhood that they deserve. Moreover, while the Kurds arguably have been the only local fighters on the ground that have in any way made progress against ISIS, Turkey has decided that its interests lay in bombing and weakening the Kurdish fighters. In doing so, Turkey prioritizes stifling any movement toward Kurdish statehood, rather than defeating ISIS. That the Obama administration and the international community allow this to continue is shameful.
3
Sorry Mr. Freidman, all you need to defeat ISIS is a coalition of of the Western Powers, such as Papa & Jr. Bush put together ( Forgive me for using the Bush Family as an example) To soundly defeat them, & then turn the area over to the Moderates, if they exist, & leave the area.I can hear the readers say, what moderates.It may not eliminate Radical Islam, but it would destroy their image as being indestructible , & will damage their ability to recruit Jihadists.I realize you cannot defeat Idealism, & this would not be a cure all, as we learned , but to do nothing will just continue their growth & increase their danger to the civilized World.
1
ISIS is the product of George W. Bush's foolish and dishonest invasion of Iraq. Friedman supported that misadventure and was wrong about the Iraq war throughout. Why trust what he says about ISIS?
1
Not to pile on but this op-ed is one of the dumbest I've ever read. The notion that Saudi Arabia will magically become a force for moderation is a joke. That will happen when they completely run out of oil AND the desert freezes over. Kurds and Turks fighting side by side, yeah right.
1
What Russia needs is new leadership which can think in new ways. The same needs as are required in our borders. He is still KGB fighting World War 2.......
1
Maybe in the next thousand years.
1
" And in October dozens of Saudi clerics called for a “holy war” against the governments of Syria, Iran and Russia." That's great. Our friends are declaring a holy war.... fun! Over the years, we have made some great investments: Purchase of Alaska, Land Grant Universities, Rebuilding of Europe. But we also have a least one great stinker, our support of Saudi Arabia. What is the ROI of our support of SA over a century? UpShot do that calculation. Let's assume it will take 30 years, 100,000 scientist & 3 Trillion dollars to develop Nuclear Fusion. What would be the ROI of that investment over a century? I think it's called a no brainier....
3
Europe had several centuries to deal with some of the same issues roiling the Middle East. The Paris Peace Conference of 1919, while getting many things wrong, also provided a roadmap of how human conflict might be resolved more or less equitably. Of course it took WW2 to finally have peace (mostly) break out all over Europe.
A good book to read on that peace process is "Paris 1919: 6 months that changed the world" by Margaret MacMillan.
There are at least 2 failed states (Iraq and Syria) in the Middle East, and Lebanon is close behind. All three states are largely the product of European colonial competition over territory from the WW1 defeated Ottoman Empire.
The Kurds are the largest ethnic group in the world that don't have their own country.
Maybe it's time for the world's great powers (The USA, EU, China and yes, Russia) to get the major regional players (Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Israel) together to try to resolve what long dead, white European politicians set up nearly 100 years ago.
A good book to read on that peace process is "Paris 1919: 6 months that changed the world" by Margaret MacMillan.
There are at least 2 failed states (Iraq and Syria) in the Middle East, and Lebanon is close behind. All three states are largely the product of European colonial competition over territory from the WW1 defeated Ottoman Empire.
The Kurds are the largest ethnic group in the world that don't have their own country.
Maybe it's time for the world's great powers (The USA, EU, China and yes, Russia) to get the major regional players (Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Israel) together to try to resolve what long dead, white European politicians set up nearly 100 years ago.
2
It's wise to remember that we've got somewhere over 40% of our population supporting our own little right wing concept of simple minded, regressive governance. If this is enlightenment, our species is doomed.
It's obvious that the NY Times has lined up all its ducks for the anti-Putin campaign. After all, he placed antimissile radar near our boarders after abrogating and ABM treaty. No sorry, that was us. But he poured millions into so called pro-democracy campaigns to support candidates that opposed our government. Sorry again, that also was us. But he's supporting dictators in the Middle East, look at Egypt. Hmm, look like us again.
Russia has been active in Syria for all of six months and Friedman, along with the Times editors are quick to condemn Russia's lack of success, but equally quick to forget that we've been wrecking havoc over the region since 2003. Our former president and VP both committed war crimes, we unilaterally attacked Libya, an act of war without a congressional declaration and have effectively dismantled Iraq and rekindled a religious conflict that had not been a problem in Iraq since the emergence of the secular Baathist Party in the 1960's.
Add to this the continuing NYTimes myth of moderate Syrian rebels. They are so moderate that after a half billion dollar training program they gave all their weapons to ISIS and defected. Russia has not had dramatic success against ISIS, but they have blocked an utterly fanciful US strategy that the 'moderates' will overthrow the government and then turn against their fellow Islamic allies. Putin sees through this bankrupt strategy, as do most world analysts. The only ones that don't seem to write for the Times.
Russia has been active in Syria for all of six months and Friedman, along with the Times editors are quick to condemn Russia's lack of success, but equally quick to forget that we've been wrecking havoc over the region since 2003. Our former president and VP both committed war crimes, we unilaterally attacked Libya, an act of war without a congressional declaration and have effectively dismantled Iraq and rekindled a religious conflict that had not been a problem in Iraq since the emergence of the secular Baathist Party in the 1960's.
Add to this the continuing NYTimes myth of moderate Syrian rebels. They are so moderate that after a half billion dollar training program they gave all their weapons to ISIS and defected. Russia has not had dramatic success against ISIS, but they have blocked an utterly fanciful US strategy that the 'moderates' will overthrow the government and then turn against their fellow Islamic allies. Putin sees through this bankrupt strategy, as do most world analysts. The only ones that don't seem to write for the Times.
3
Vladimir Putin appears to have become his country's version of George W. Bush.
There is no pleasure to be taken in that thought. The world does not have time to re-fight the Crimean War while tackling the much bigger issue of combating climate change.
There is no pleasure to be taken in that thought. The world does not have time to re-fight the Crimean War while tackling the much bigger issue of combating climate change.
Read the below...very telling;
https://www.commentarymagazine.com/foreign-policy/middle-east/obama-favo...
https://www.commentarymagazine.com/foreign-policy/middle-east/obama-favo...
Most of the comments miss Mr. Friedman's very valid point: we put boots on the ground and keep them there indefinetly or we find some other means to defeat ISIS. One can no pick Obama's tactics in pursuit of a solution but his overall strategy is what we all agree on. So far Obama is executing well as it requires patience and restraint and he is good at those virtues. He has in fact contained and diminished ISIS. They have responded with effots to break out of these restrains in Paris and now Lybia. Obama will respond in time. But he knows the only alternative to an indefinite and large American force on the ground defending an American designed restructuring of the middle East is an Arab solution. And the only real problem for us in pursuing that goal is election time at home.
1
Mr. Friedman,
You sound like Rumsfeld when you say things like President Obama has done an 'impossible job badly'.
What does that mean?
'Impossible' is pretty definitive.
I would say he thoroughly examined an impossible set of circumstances and smartly decided there was no upside to intervention: only loss of life, limb, sanity, treasure and prestige.
In short: he continues to avoid doing 'stupid stuff'.
You sound like Rumsfeld when you say things like President Obama has done an 'impossible job badly'.
What does that mean?
'Impossible' is pretty definitive.
I would say he thoroughly examined an impossible set of circumstances and smartly decided there was no upside to intervention: only loss of life, limb, sanity, treasure and prestige.
In short: he continues to avoid doing 'stupid stuff'.
2
Why read anything from an author who enthusiastically supported Bush's invasion of Iraq which took the cork out of the bottle in the Middle East? He knows very little.
1
Friedman has not changed with his "we are all in this together" attitude.
Putin is after Turkey's leader for the ISIS oil flow generating cash. It is only a matter of time as Russia builds its forces in the region to give a devastating blow. As oil lines to Turkey are now being destroyed, the Russians are focusing on the Turkey-Syria border for supplies coming out of Turkey. Furthermore, you don't have any more flights from the US supplying the "Turkmen."
The recent effort by the US to use more special forces is to continue playing the game of control. Yes, it is a game with ISIS. Obama Strategy? There never was one. As for how the Russians will handle it backed by Israel, Iran, India, China, and other Eurasian nations. After Syria, they will continue going to the sources wherever they may be. In other words, in time this may be the end of the puppet kingdoms who fund ISIS.
Putin is after Turkey's leader for the ISIS oil flow generating cash. It is only a matter of time as Russia builds its forces in the region to give a devastating blow. As oil lines to Turkey are now being destroyed, the Russians are focusing on the Turkey-Syria border for supplies coming out of Turkey. Furthermore, you don't have any more flights from the US supplying the "Turkmen."
The recent effort by the US to use more special forces is to continue playing the game of control. Yes, it is a game with ISIS. Obama Strategy? There never was one. As for how the Russians will handle it backed by Israel, Iran, India, China, and other Eurasian nations. After Syria, they will continue going to the sources wherever they may be. In other words, in time this may be the end of the puppet kingdoms who fund ISIS.
Tom hasn't written of consequence since from beirut to jerusalem, and even that has been downgraded in the light of history...that said, you think tom could actually write an article on how foolish it was for obama to make erdogan his new BFF in the middle east back in 2010? Many wrote about it then in glowing terms....now, all of those writers are largely silent about it...
go figure....
go figure....
I don't think Russia likes Assad. Russia wants the mid east airstrips and military bases , Mediterranean ports and access to the oil fields in the Mideast. Assad is a tool and if he becomes too costly he will have a car accident or something. Russia has their own Muslim issues in the Caucasus areas and the Stans territories including the Tartars and others. Let Russia spend themselves into the grave as Reagan did and let us limit their western expansion using Dollars and sanctions and trade embargoes. Russia cannot keep this up on 40 dollar oil.
The first thing Putin will ask for in return for Russia's "constructive support" will be the dropping of EU/US economic sanctions. A non-starter, I hope. We can't legitimize Putin's land grab one iota. If the EU is "America's most important partner" then we must remain united on sanctions on Russia, maybe even tighten them.
Allow me some candor here. Mr.Friedman has not been able to see straight on this issue, persistently since 9/11.
He wants, after 100 years, we let Turkey shape Syria's future. We are not told why. He tells us, quote, Truth be told, I wish Putin had succeeded. unquote. Disingenuous: from very first comment (Mr.Putin is going up the tree and would need our help) till today, Mr.Friedman has not wished the Russians well. Its telling mere 60 days on, here is Mr.Friedman trumpeting that already the Russians have failed. Today "crafty" Mr.Putin, with hidden, ulterior goals.
Idea we ask Saudia to take up fight against ISIS is preposterous. No difference, none, between Saudia and ISIS. Well, yes, ISIS is way less corrupt!
He speaks for civil war between moderate Sunni and extremist sunnis. There isn't one, figment of his imagination. His idea we can 1200 years on minimize Sunni-Shiite struggle is frankly a pie in the sky. Finally the flawed narrative that we give Muslim males power and job and a girl to go with, for full measure, will help against ISIS.
When ISIS first burst into the scene, I postulated that you cannot defeat ISIS unless you go after its patrons: Turkey and Qatar. More true today. I am not surprised that both Turkey and Qatar are yet again given a complete free pass by Mr.Friedman.
I told you, Mr.Friedman has not been able to see straight on this issue, since 9/11/2001.
He wants, after 100 years, we let Turkey shape Syria's future. We are not told why. He tells us, quote, Truth be told, I wish Putin had succeeded. unquote. Disingenuous: from very first comment (Mr.Putin is going up the tree and would need our help) till today, Mr.Friedman has not wished the Russians well. Its telling mere 60 days on, here is Mr.Friedman trumpeting that already the Russians have failed. Today "crafty" Mr.Putin, with hidden, ulterior goals.
Idea we ask Saudia to take up fight against ISIS is preposterous. No difference, none, between Saudia and ISIS. Well, yes, ISIS is way less corrupt!
He speaks for civil war between moderate Sunni and extremist sunnis. There isn't one, figment of his imagination. His idea we can 1200 years on minimize Sunni-Shiite struggle is frankly a pie in the sky. Finally the flawed narrative that we give Muslim males power and job and a girl to go with, for full measure, will help against ISIS.
When ISIS first burst into the scene, I postulated that you cannot defeat ISIS unless you go after its patrons: Turkey and Qatar. More true today. I am not surprised that both Turkey and Qatar are yet again given a complete free pass by Mr.Friedman.
I told you, Mr.Friedman has not been able to see straight on this issue, since 9/11/2001.
2
Impossible jobs always turn out badly ---that is what none of the candidates understand. I think Hillary knows it is an impossible job, but must appear to know how to make sense out of this mess, but at least she will not make the same shock and awe disaster of the Bush/Cheney administration.
Boldly going where Friedman dares not; part II
http://www.debka.com/article/25032/Massive-Russian-blanket-air-bombardme...
http://www.debka.com/article/25032/Massive-Russian-blanket-air-bombardme...
By the way, I would refer everyone and Thomas to debkafile's article of less than 2 weeks ago outlining Putin's ACTUAL achievement against ISIS. In short, it said that Putin, following the downed airliner, ordered the complete annihilation of Raaqa, isis' command center. Whereas obama knew where it was and would not hit it for fear of "collateral" damage, Putin said the hell with that, the game is on, this is war, and we will reduce Raaqa to rubble Dresden style, block by block, sending a signal to the Muslim world, don't mess with us. It is the right approach when dealing with Muslim extremism. The same should have been done to Fallujah.
When I read that article, despite Crimea being swallowed up, I found myself admiring Putin. Now that is indeed interesting.
When I read that article, despite Crimea being swallowed up, I found myself admiring Putin. Now that is indeed interesting.
1
A completely useless column. If the job is impossible, then what does it matter whether Obama does it well or badly? Is there even a difference between doing it well or badly? What is the point of taking up space on the Op-Ed page to ask for things that will never happen, e.g. for Saudi Arabia to "aggressively delegitimize" radical jihadism?
I am taking this column as part of Friedman's quid pro quo deal with Saudis. First, he writes that prosperous column defending their misogyny and barbarism. Now, he churns out this column berating the Russians instead of confronting the Saudis and Turks for financially supporting Al Qaeda, ISIS, and Sunni Extremists in Syria, Libya, and around the world.
2
What we need is swift decisive action. Wars are won on the battlefield not in debates . We have wasted time, now we should act.
I have been reading about Syria and following the news for 4 years. It seems that all western thought is that Assad should go. Has anyone asked who gave you the right to decide that? What if Assad decides that Obama should be deposed? Is that acceptable? As long as you start your thesis with the premise that you are allowed to decide the fate of the leader of another country, whatever the reasoning, your thinking is flawed and goes against the lessons of history. The best example the west could set is to say: " We do not decide who governs other countries. We just help them against terrorists if we feel like doing so or else leave them alone". Other people can decide for themselves who they want as a ruler. Just as someone in the west would be a terrorist if he tried to bring down his/her government, so it should be in the East and its middle.
1
Syria is not a democracy so Syrians can not kick Assad out. Some rebels are trying to do that by force with mixed luck because Russia supports Assad and now they are paying the price.
The whole article is a complete nonsense. It is very convenient and politically correct to blame Putin for anything and everything and insist on status quo fantasying that somehow everything will get resolved.
2
Let us consider Putin's successes in the matter. There will be no more Turkish meddling in Northern Syria that does not include their F-16's being shot down. All transports into Syria from Turkey will be in the cross hairs of Russian fighters, bombers and missiles. Further advances by the rebels who use modern US supplied TOW missile systems, will not happen. Remember, it was a TOW missile that shot down the Russian EVAC helicopter. Russia does not play nearly as recklessly as the US by handing out modern weapons to armed groups in the region. I suspect Putin will take control of much of western Syria, and leave the east to the Americans and their so called coalition. Russia needn't bother supporting US missions any more than the US supporting Russian ones. At this time, the two countries barely speak when coordinating sorties. The US will not get it's regime change either in Ukraine or Syria. Fortunately for these two contries, the dismal US track record in Libya, Iraq, and Afghanistan will give pause.
2
Putin saved the secular government of Assad. That allows some millions of
Christians not to have their heads chopped off. That matters naught
to Friedman, but it matters to Christians.Recall that the USA is 78% Christian
and under 2% Jewish.
Christians not to have their heads chopped off. That matters naught
to Friedman, but it matters to Christians.Recall that the USA is 78% Christian
and under 2% Jewish.
2
The long view is that when the Ottoman Empire collapsed after WW1, peoples who were intermingled and ruled top-down suddenly were let to forge their future; and the more we become involved the more we become the focus of that struggle. "Bombing the..." only causes more civilian casualties and creates a wave of people who self-radicalize. I am very sure ISIS has embedded itself deeply into the mosques, schools and hospitals of its territory to maximize this effect. If everything we can do only creates an even bigger backlash why bother. Accept the refugees as a gift, people are not liabilities, they are the most valuable of resources.
Russia has made things worse, using a carpet bombing technique from 60 years ago that has killed more civilians than ISIS fighters. The Putin grandstanding hasn't worked either - that's why he walked around the climate talks with a pout on his face, refusing to meet with Turkey, while he set up his surface to air missile system in Syria. Probably can't wait to use it, either, regardless of whose plane he shoots down. He may presume that Syria is another Crimea, where he's actually wanted. But being wanted by Assad is another matter entirely. If Assad departs like most of the world wants now that he's created the mess of the century, then Putin has no standing there whatsoever. Would Putin be seen as a peacemaker if he were to convince Assad to defect - not likely.
It may eventually occur to people that Obama is approaching things correctly, leaving the ground war to the Muslims, and supporting the Iraqi military with its Shiites and moderate Sunnis to give them an edge over ISIS. The gradual progression may be better overall, in that it allows time for the world to figure out the end game.
A separate Sunni state, like Friedman suggests, may look good by the time the fighting is over. The Kurds have carved out their piece. Similarly, Syria should be dissolved into two independent entities, with a DMZ and an overarching international aid group set up for each to rebuild. The Saudis and Qatar should pay for that, due to their long term funding of terrorism.
It may eventually occur to people that Obama is approaching things correctly, leaving the ground war to the Muslims, and supporting the Iraqi military with its Shiites and moderate Sunnis to give them an edge over ISIS. The gradual progression may be better overall, in that it allows time for the world to figure out the end game.
A separate Sunni state, like Friedman suggests, may look good by the time the fighting is over. The Kurds have carved out their piece. Similarly, Syria should be dissolved into two independent entities, with a DMZ and an overarching international aid group set up for each to rebuild. The Saudis and Qatar should pay for that, due to their long term funding of terrorism.
It appears that Friedman has the view that the Shi'ite should just pack up and go home. Assad still controls 1/3 of Syria, and I don't believe a coalition government can be formed with one major component. Fighting will continue whether or not the ISIS is defeated.
you need someone to talk to who would represent Sunnis in Iraq, perhaps also in Syria. At the moment this is ISIS. This is the problem.
President Putin sees the way to defeat ISIS through strengthening statehoods already existing in the region.
Only strong secular national states (what Iraq and Syria used to be) stop ISIS.
Re-instatement of the Syria statehood in its recognized borders is an obvious step in the right direction.
Any other suggested alternatives lack feasibility or are simply a propaganda.
Only strong secular national states (what Iraq and Syria used to be) stop ISIS.
Re-instatement of the Syria statehood in its recognized borders is an obvious step in the right direction.
Any other suggested alternatives lack feasibility or are simply a propaganda.
1
Just had to throw in a dig at George W. Bush, didn't ya, Tom?
Let's be clear. Regardless of how badly the post-war occupation had been mismanaged ... and it was horribly mismanaged ... the fact is that in 2009, George Bush handed Barack Obama an Iraq and a Middle East that was largely pacified.
Your hero, Barack Obama, was the one who, and against the advice of all of his senior military commanders, stupidly gave the order to pull out all US forces from Iraq so that he could crow about "ending the war" during the run-up to the 2012 election. Even a residual force of 5,000 marines stationed in Iraq could have easily squashed ISIS when they first became a problem.
He then compouded this error by standing off in the corner and sucking his thumb for two years while ISIS acquired more recruits, weapons, money, and power. Now the Middle East is a mess, US influence is at low ebb, Russian and Iranian influence are on the rise, 200,000+ Syrians are dead, and Europe is overrun with refugees, some of whom are almost certainly jihadists in disguise.
But this is what one gets when one votes to elect a "community organizer" with no managerial or foreign policy experience whatsoever to be one's "Commander-In-Chief". Well, we were dumb enough to re-elect him. We deserve it.
Let's be clear. Regardless of how badly the post-war occupation had been mismanaged ... and it was horribly mismanaged ... the fact is that in 2009, George Bush handed Barack Obama an Iraq and a Middle East that was largely pacified.
Your hero, Barack Obama, was the one who, and against the advice of all of his senior military commanders, stupidly gave the order to pull out all US forces from Iraq so that he could crow about "ending the war" during the run-up to the 2012 election. Even a residual force of 5,000 marines stationed in Iraq could have easily squashed ISIS when they first became a problem.
He then compouded this error by standing off in the corner and sucking his thumb for two years while ISIS acquired more recruits, weapons, money, and power. Now the Middle East is a mess, US influence is at low ebb, Russian and Iranian influence are on the rise, 200,000+ Syrians are dead, and Europe is overrun with refugees, some of whom are almost certainly jihadists in disguise.
But this is what one gets when one votes to elect a "community organizer" with no managerial or foreign policy experience whatsoever to be one's "Commander-In-Chief". Well, we were dumb enough to re-elect him. We deserve it.
Friedman suggests that there is a teeny cluster of "power sharing" synapses inside the Muslim and Arab mind and must be fostered. That may be a delusion.
This article paints a pretty impossible problem to solve. There are so many convergent interests it is going to be nearly impossible to satisfy all the warring parties and their background interests. My eyebrows were raised when the author claimed "Obama has done an impossible job badly, and someone else might have done better". Really? Why the shot at the president? Can the author name anything 'he could have done better'? If so, please lay out the plan in your next article.
1
The Russian bomber did not "stray" into Turkish air space. It was a deliberate and provocative incursion that followed repeated previous incursions ordered by a delusional imperialist who lives for little more than to expand his warped image of empire and to poke President Obama in the eye.
Among the impossibilities confronting the President in the Middle East is the prospect of engaging a Russian leader who seems willing to sacrifice his country's long-term strategic interests for the cheap thrill (as Mr. Friedman put it) of checking the West at the tactical level, and killing lots of people into the bargain.
In such a confrontation, Mr. Putin can count on the whole GOP as a fifth column inside the United States.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
Among the impossibilities confronting the President in the Middle East is the prospect of engaging a Russian leader who seems willing to sacrifice his country's long-term strategic interests for the cheap thrill (as Mr. Friedman put it) of checking the West at the tactical level, and killing lots of people into the bargain.
In such a confrontation, Mr. Putin can count on the whole GOP as a fifth column inside the United States.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
1
The new calculus of war dictates what we must do:
– A wired world can be inflamed by evil in an instant.
– Nuclear-armed apocalyptic radical-Islamist terrorists not constrained by MAD must be stopped. Now.
– Asymmetric warfare has no coordinates and requires only one consenting player
– When the terrorists declare war on us, we are, perforce, at war.
– We have only two options: fight or die.
– The Law of Parsimony applies.
– The complexities suggested by Mr. Friedman, even if achievable–and haven't several thousand years proven otherwise?–would take too long.
– Friedman's fanciful conceit suffers the same flaw as Obama's: The arrogance of the armchair general.
War is not a process but an endpoint, a manifestation of the collective will to survive when confronted by an intractable lethal force.
The only solution is to bomb ISIS to oblivion, send in the troops to mop it up and stay in the region indefinitely, something we must do in any case, given the refractory nature of the disease.
– A wired world can be inflamed by evil in an instant.
– Nuclear-armed apocalyptic radical-Islamist terrorists not constrained by MAD must be stopped. Now.
– Asymmetric warfare has no coordinates and requires only one consenting player
– When the terrorists declare war on us, we are, perforce, at war.
– We have only two options: fight or die.
– The Law of Parsimony applies.
– The complexities suggested by Mr. Friedman, even if achievable–and haven't several thousand years proven otherwise?–would take too long.
– Friedman's fanciful conceit suffers the same flaw as Obama's: The arrogance of the armchair general.
War is not a process but an endpoint, a manifestation of the collective will to survive when confronted by an intractable lethal force.
The only solution is to bomb ISIS to oblivion, send in the troops to mop it up and stay in the region indefinitely, something we must do in any case, given the refractory nature of the disease.
2
In short, we need a miracle, and it won't happen..The best we can hope for, is to contain the fallout, and try to prevent another major attack like the one that just occured in Paris . The odds are not good..
Neo's would have US troops serve as proxies/mercenaries for fundamentalist Wahabbi Saudi clerics & their Gulf princes who have called for a “holy war” against the governments of Syria, Iran and Russia.
You can say that when it comes to ISIS and Syria, Obama has done an impossible job well, and neo cheerleaders for shock & awe in support of Sunni fundamentalists would have done much,much worse.
You can say that when it comes to ISIS and Syria, Obama has done an impossible job well, and neo cheerleaders for shock & awe in support of Sunni fundamentalists would have done much,much worse.
2
Obama knows that doing nothing is sometimes the best approach to an intractable problem. He also knows that politicians are rewarded for action rather than inaction, so he appears to be taking action.
The problem is that Obama is not "doing nothing". He surged in Afghanistan; bombed Libya; has been intervening in Syria (Assad must go) to overthrown to overthrow the government of Syria. He is sending special forces into Iraq and Syria. He is bombing Syria. He is killing with drones.
Russians just posted a lot of evidence showing thousands of ISIL trucks delivering oil to some (mysterious?) buyers in Turkey. I'm assuming the ISIL is paid by their (mysterious?) customer.
Apparently someone in Turkey didn't appreciate the Russian air force disrupting the supply of ISIL-provided oil - actually stolen oil from Syria - and therefore they shot down a Russian bomber plane.
So, I'm wondering on whose side is Friedman here? Clearly he's not on Russia's side so is he supporting ISIL and the Turks? I'm asking because there's not even a hint in Friedman's piece of the ISIL-Turkey mutually beneficial relationship. Is Friedman sorry to hear that the Russians are in the process of cutting off ISIL's economic lifeline? It seems to be the case. No?
Apparently someone in Turkey didn't appreciate the Russian air force disrupting the supply of ISIL-provided oil - actually stolen oil from Syria - and therefore they shot down a Russian bomber plane.
So, I'm wondering on whose side is Friedman here? Clearly he's not on Russia's side so is he supporting ISIL and the Turks? I'm asking because there's not even a hint in Friedman's piece of the ISIL-Turkey mutually beneficial relationship. Is Friedman sorry to hear that the Russians are in the process of cutting off ISIL's economic lifeline? It seems to be the case. No?
3
Millions are dying in Africa. DR Congo,Nigeria, Somalia and Sudan to name a few. Why no columns with military and political strategies? They have oil, Muslims, tribal hatred, mineral wealth and have exported terrorism. What they do not have is occupying forces, Zionist interests, and zero political will to engage the nut jobs. Maybe we should just leave the ME and encourage massive Jewish immigration to the US. Let the crazies kill each other with a total news blackout.
Let us take all our blood and treasure to fight the world's many failed states until we finally (soon enough) join their ranks.
"You need Saudi Arabia and the leading Sunni religious powers to aggressively delegitimize ISIS’s Islamist narrative. ..." This is THE fundamental strategy, essentially blockading the IS where it is by cutting its ties and links to elsewhere. A tight border and traffic control is absolutely essential. The fundamental problem is that not many here or elsewhere seem to appreciate the extraordinarily complex nature of this multi-variable equation and reduce the conversation to trivial simplicity, thus obscuring the potential solutions.
I do not quite understand how the world is tolerating the Sauidi's, Yemeni's, etc. to stay on the sidelines, totally disengaged from a problem that has the seeds coming from their thought processes and actions. Why is there not any stronger voices that may push other neighboring countries to disengage from their relations with ISIL?
Ultimately, this is not the war of the US but the local countries. They cannot simply stay on the sidelines and expect the US and other Western forces to clean up the mess they helped create. They should also stop prosecuting the past mistakes and put the entire blame on the US and other western countries. Look into the future to find the solutions, we all agree on the past mistakes going all the way back to the first humanoid smashing the skull of another one with a large stick or bone. That should help us understand how sad a species we have become.
Nothing seems to have changed since!
I do not quite understand how the world is tolerating the Sauidi's, Yemeni's, etc. to stay on the sidelines, totally disengaged from a problem that has the seeds coming from their thought processes and actions. Why is there not any stronger voices that may push other neighboring countries to disengage from their relations with ISIL?
Ultimately, this is not the war of the US but the local countries. They cannot simply stay on the sidelines and expect the US and other Western forces to clean up the mess they helped create. They should also stop prosecuting the past mistakes and put the entire blame on the US and other western countries. Look into the future to find the solutions, we all agree on the past mistakes going all the way back to the first humanoid smashing the skull of another one with a large stick or bone. That should help us understand how sad a species we have become.
Nothing seems to have changed since!
There is a basic misunderstanding in this article, a category error, and it is summed up in the sentence:
"The only way to defeat ISIS is to minimize the struggle between Sunnis and Shiites and strengthen the fighting capacity of moderate Sunnis against extremist ones."
Edsel fails to ask the key question - "who fights religious wars?" to which there is one answer "not religious moderates." The moderates in Syria are busy fleeing from the religious and political extremists on all sides, that is the heart of the refugee crisis. The idea that you are going to find on any side in a religious war, or a civil war "moderates" is a fantasy.
Daesh may be the most extreme among the over one hundred armed groups in Syria, but that does not mean that the other groups are moderates, or that if they win it will be suddenly a "spring time for tolerance and moderation in Syria."
Again, the moderates are busy leaving the room - they are in Jordan, Turkey and trudging to Western Europe 9with perhaps the odd ISIS/Daesh infiltrator mixed in.)
"The only way to defeat ISIS is to minimize the struggle between Sunnis and Shiites and strengthen the fighting capacity of moderate Sunnis against extremist ones."
Edsel fails to ask the key question - "who fights religious wars?" to which there is one answer "not religious moderates." The moderates in Syria are busy fleeing from the religious and political extremists on all sides, that is the heart of the refugee crisis. The idea that you are going to find on any side in a religious war, or a civil war "moderates" is a fantasy.
Daesh may be the most extreme among the over one hundred armed groups in Syria, but that does not mean that the other groups are moderates, or that if they win it will be suddenly a "spring time for tolerance and moderation in Syria."
Again, the moderates are busy leaving the room - they are in Jordan, Turkey and trudging to Western Europe 9with perhaps the odd ISIS/Daesh infiltrator mixed in.)
A very insightful, informed, and reasoned approach. There are no easy answers. People and candidates that bluster about more bombs and name calling are ignorant. I trust John McCain and Lindsey Graham when they call for more troops, but firmly believe that we are better doing nothing than going in and not having a firm plan for how to manage the situation after we win the ground war. In Iraq, Mission Accomplished really turned out to be just the start of the toughest part of the endeavor and the part we were not able to be successful at and which ultimately created the foundation for ISIS. Giving the moderate Sunni's and Kurds a cause to fight for, working the diplomatic front with Turkey, Russia and Iran, and taking a longer term view are the only answers.
As usual, Friedman's analysis of the Middle East is half-baked.
It is easy to make fun of Putin's bumbling into the Middle East morass, but everything, and more, one can critique in Putin's steps can be held against the US's efforts in the region in the past 20 years - again, which Friedman supported. He points to the two Russian soldiers and the 224 airline casualties as "proof" of Putin's folly - what about the 5000 US soldiers killed and 100's of thousands maimed for life?
Whatever may be wrong with Putin's approach, he is spot on in maintaining that just "defeating" ISIS and pushing Assad out of power will leave a power vacuum, leading to more radical groups creating their own little fiefdoms - Libya is a case in point.
The US especially has this crazy view that just by getting rid of un-democratic leaders (BTW, the US has installed its fair share of despotic leaders when it suited its economic and political objectives) will miraculously lead to liberal, democratic governments. Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya are objects lessons in the fallacy, yes idiocy of that approach.
The fallback position of the nutty neocons is the crazy notion that "the world is better off without Saddam" - ask most of the Iraqis now living in the smoldering remains of what was once a stable, even liberal country - women were treated much better by Saddam than by today's leaders - or ask the 100's of thousands of Iraqis now dead as a result of the US's "nation building" effort.
It is easy to make fun of Putin's bumbling into the Middle East morass, but everything, and more, one can critique in Putin's steps can be held against the US's efforts in the region in the past 20 years - again, which Friedman supported. He points to the two Russian soldiers and the 224 airline casualties as "proof" of Putin's folly - what about the 5000 US soldiers killed and 100's of thousands maimed for life?
Whatever may be wrong with Putin's approach, he is spot on in maintaining that just "defeating" ISIS and pushing Assad out of power will leave a power vacuum, leading to more radical groups creating their own little fiefdoms - Libya is a case in point.
The US especially has this crazy view that just by getting rid of un-democratic leaders (BTW, the US has installed its fair share of despotic leaders when it suited its economic and political objectives) will miraculously lead to liberal, democratic governments. Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya are objects lessons in the fallacy, yes idiocy of that approach.
The fallback position of the nutty neocons is the crazy notion that "the world is better off without Saddam" - ask most of the Iraqis now living in the smoldering remains of what was once a stable, even liberal country - women were treated much better by Saddam than by today's leaders - or ask the 100's of thousands of Iraqis now dead as a result of the US's "nation building" effort.
5
When you consider that our kids and grand kids are not dying or maimed, by the thousands, at a cost of billions, then i would say Obama has done excellent!
1
I am very disappointed about Russia's effort to fight against ISIS, considered ineffective and ridiculed. How this narrative helps to defeat ISIS with Collaboration.
We are dictating our resolutions and they are not Ok with that.
I certainly don't buy it, Iran and Russia is at odds.
Region is become so fractured and fragmented, refugee crisis reahed climax, regions nations internal security is under threat,
This is not a middle east game anymore it is spreaded to Turkey, Russia and Europe.
We are dictating our resolutions and they are not Ok with that.
I certainly don't buy it, Iran and Russia is at odds.
Region is become so fractured and fragmented, refugee crisis reahed climax, regions nations internal security is under threat,
This is not a middle east game anymore it is spreaded to Turkey, Russia and Europe.
1
Alas, this is not what conservative Americans want. To their way of thinking those soldiers should be American soldiers who die for American ideals, not Russian soldiers dying for Russian ideals.
In the conservative world its all about ideals and piling up dead bodies: your kid as well as the enemy. And then they're real proud of your dead kid--the live one they could not have cared less about.
That's how it works here any more...
In the conservative world its all about ideals and piling up dead bodies: your kid as well as the enemy. And then they're real proud of your dead kid--the live one they could not have cared less about.
That's how it works here any more...
1
It's a little early to be judging the results of Putin's policy. Whereas the Russian setbacks described here would be very damaging politically for an American president, Russian public opinion tends to react to adversity with a patriotic circling of wagons.
There is never going to be a Muslim, Arab army to take down ISIS. Russia, America, and Europe should partner with Iran and the Kurds to destroy the Islamic state. The Kurds' move to cut the links between ISIS-held Syrian and Iraqi territory should be just a first step. Iraqi and Iranian forces should be tasked with clearing Anbar, while Russian, American, European, and Kurdish forces should focus on ISIS in Syria. It's a doable job. Will it increase Sunni Arab hatred for ourselves and the others? Probably. But so what -- they already hate us.
In any case, I don't know that a prominent supporter of Bush II's Iraq war should be pontificating about Putin's much more limited intervention in Syria.
There is never going to be a Muslim, Arab army to take down ISIS. Russia, America, and Europe should partner with Iran and the Kurds to destroy the Islamic state. The Kurds' move to cut the links between ISIS-held Syrian and Iraqi territory should be just a first step. Iraqi and Iranian forces should be tasked with clearing Anbar, while Russian, American, European, and Kurdish forces should focus on ISIS in Syria. It's a doable job. Will it increase Sunni Arab hatred for ourselves and the others? Probably. But so what -- they already hate us.
In any case, I don't know that a prominent supporter of Bush II's Iraq war should be pontificating about Putin's much more limited intervention in Syria.
1
I read and listen to "analysis" everyday from politicians and pundits. Tom now and has always reduced it ineluctably to its essense - It's the Sunni v. Shia, stupid; To the extent that any analysis continues to use territory to define the issue - such as "Iraq" or "Syria" a complicated problem becomes more complicated, and further confuses the American public. We have been hearing about the Arab "moderates" for years now - remember, these are the Sunni that we have been training with our advisers and that turned and ran from ISIS (and dropped their US supplied expensive weapons!) because they chose not to fight their Sunni brethren. As Tom alludes: Don't kid yourself, the only way we can save this part of the world and ourselves is to decend with hundreds of thousands of troops and hold the territory and to impose a non-phychotic way of looking at the world. "Boots on the ground" say the Republicans? What a bunch of pablum, without a commitment to some form of mandatory service. This is a cancer metasisiziing - A gang of hopeless devils. If the US won't lead, who will? Turkey? Saudi Arabia? I guess we will have to wait and see how we all respond if and when there is an attack or two on the homeland.
"In short, you need either a power-sharing political solution that all the key players accept and will enforce..."
So, basically, you need divine intervention.
So, basically, you need divine intervention.
1
Or you could say Obama has done as good a job in Syria as possible, just depends on your political agenda. Let's remember that the biggest knocks on PBO in Syria are two rhetorical missteps; the red line and the JV. Set aside the fact that every president will eventually say something stupid, neither of these "statements" have real on the ground consequences. in fact, those chemical weapons that warranted the red line, they were removed and destroyed by none other than our Russian buddies. I would call that a "huuuugh" success. No Amercian blood spilled, and the limited mission accomplished. As for showing his characteristic restraint and patience, no drama Obama has played the cards he was dealt in admirable fashion.
When I was younger I use to read Mr. Friedman's pieces and be in alomost total agreement! It seemed he had the answer to all the world's problems and those problems would be solved if everyone just followed his advice.
Then I grew up.
Mr. Friedman's opinion of what needs to be done in the Middle East is one way of going about it but not the right way. He speaks of forming coalitions where it is impossible. Sunnis and Shia have been at each others throat for THOUSANDS of years. Does anyone honestly think anything we or anyone else does will change that? I don't think so. He talks of removing Assad and forming some kind of coalition government. How has that worked for us in Iraq? In Libya? Egypt is also still suspect. Assad leaving would only add to the failed Nation States in the region. He talks as if Mr. Putin just dove into the fray with reckless abandon. Anyone who knows history knows that Syria has been an ally of, first the U.S.S.R. and now Russia. The only Russian Naval base in the Mediterranian is located in Syria. Anyone with common sense knows that Russia considers Syria to be strategically important to Russia. If someone was trying to take over Britain would we stand idly by or would we help our ally? Why does anyone think Russia would'nt do the same?
Mr. Friedman sometimes has good ideas but I'm afraid his ideas come with strings attached. He's on America's side and can not think outside that box.
Then I grew up.
Mr. Friedman's opinion of what needs to be done in the Middle East is one way of going about it but not the right way. He speaks of forming coalitions where it is impossible. Sunnis and Shia have been at each others throat for THOUSANDS of years. Does anyone honestly think anything we or anyone else does will change that? I don't think so. He talks of removing Assad and forming some kind of coalition government. How has that worked for us in Iraq? In Libya? Egypt is also still suspect. Assad leaving would only add to the failed Nation States in the region. He talks as if Mr. Putin just dove into the fray with reckless abandon. Anyone who knows history knows that Syria has been an ally of, first the U.S.S.R. and now Russia. The only Russian Naval base in the Mediterranian is located in Syria. Anyone with common sense knows that Russia considers Syria to be strategically important to Russia. If someone was trying to take over Britain would we stand idly by or would we help our ally? Why does anyone think Russia would'nt do the same?
Mr. Friedman sometimes has good ideas but I'm afraid his ideas come with strings attached. He's on America's side and can not think outside that box.
The "three things we need to understand" describe a course of action that will ultimately lead our country into yet another quagmire. How can a coalition of western nations be forged? How can a coalition of western nations "minimize the struggle between Sunnis and Shiites"--- struggle has been taking place for centuries? How can a coalition of western nations "strengthen the fighting capacity of moderate Sunnis against extremist ones" without alienating Shiites?
The best course of action would be to provide humanitarian support to those nations that have absorbed the Syrian refugees and "minimize the struggle between Sunnis and Shiites" by accepting their differences and creating new boundaries between nations in the Middle East that allow ethnic and religious cultures to live together peaceably.
The best course of action would be to provide humanitarian support to those nations that have absorbed the Syrian refugees and "minimize the struggle between Sunnis and Shiites" by accepting their differences and creating new boundaries between nations in the Middle East that allow ethnic and religious cultures to live together peaceably.
As I explained in an earlier, unpublished, comment the solution is simple:
1) Set Bashar up in a dacha of his choosing, somewhere outside of Syria.
2) Annex Syria and most of northern Iraq to Iran.
3) Go home.
While Iran is not exactly the Magic Kingdom, they are running a twenty-first century nation with a modest degree of stability and tolerance and this re-subdivison of the Middle-eastern borders is somewhat more reflective of the local religious lunacy.
We are accommodative to regimes far more off center than Iran for far less productive reasons, so this is probably the best, if not the only, solution to a problem created by nineteenth century, British map makers.
In return for this gracious gift to the Mullahs, accommodations, including semi-autonomy for Kurdish, Sunni, and Turkoman minorities is the price of another few hundred thousand acres of oil-rich territory.
The Iranian army is significantly better suited to dealing with ISIS than the more "nuanced" operations of the U. S. Marines: beheadings all around.
Russia would be happy to have a stable southern neighbor, with little tolerance for an internal Caliphate within its borders.
Iran, in gratitude for our generosity would enact a one year ban on chanting "Death to America" in public.
And the Sunnis could turn their attention to the unpleasantness on their south side.
Is the Noble Peace Prize Committee paying attention?
1) Set Bashar up in a dacha of his choosing, somewhere outside of Syria.
2) Annex Syria and most of northern Iraq to Iran.
3) Go home.
While Iran is not exactly the Magic Kingdom, they are running a twenty-first century nation with a modest degree of stability and tolerance and this re-subdivison of the Middle-eastern borders is somewhat more reflective of the local religious lunacy.
We are accommodative to regimes far more off center than Iran for far less productive reasons, so this is probably the best, if not the only, solution to a problem created by nineteenth century, British map makers.
In return for this gracious gift to the Mullahs, accommodations, including semi-autonomy for Kurdish, Sunni, and Turkoman minorities is the price of another few hundred thousand acres of oil-rich territory.
The Iranian army is significantly better suited to dealing with ISIS than the more "nuanced" operations of the U. S. Marines: beheadings all around.
Russia would be happy to have a stable southern neighbor, with little tolerance for an internal Caliphate within its borders.
Iran, in gratitude for our generosity would enact a one year ban on chanting "Death to America" in public.
And the Sunnis could turn their attention to the unpleasantness on their south side.
Is the Noble Peace Prize Committee paying attention?
Interestingly, the former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, Michael Flynn, has essentially come up with the very same 'solution' to the Syria/ISIS issue. Of course, Flynn also says that the Obama administration created a false narrative of ISIS because of re-election concerns. So, give Obama a pass on this if you want, but we can't bury our heads in the sand anymore - time to build a coalition with regional powers, negotiate with Russia and let's go in and wipe out ISIS and put into place a structure that will not allow Islamist extremists to churn out suicide bombers before something really bad happens like an accident between US and Russian forces.
m they represent is a corrupted and deranged rendition of the holy book. their twisted, distorted reading will cause carnage and devastation on a massive scale in near future if the world doesn't act to stop it. my recommendation to the author and anyone who happens to read my comment is plain and simple, one need not look too far to realize how satanic this Wahhabi clique truly are, all you need to do is google the images of the none- political Shiite clergymen of the past and the present, the likes of ayatollah Sistani, and i mean the authentic mystics with threadbare mantles and compare them with the Wahhabi grisly faces to firmly grasp the gravity of the situation. finish the al saud dynasty and all problems dissipate.
Putin may not be Kasparov, but conversely, it didn't take Kasparovian genius to see the coming Russia-Iran checkmate of a deluded community organizer blinded by his own imagined brilliance.
The calculus of war has been changed forever by the nuclear arming of apocalyptic radical-Islamist terrorists not constrained by MAD.
“I’ve been very clear that Iran will not get a nuclear weapon on my watch.”
– Obama to T. Friedman
Obama's hollow commitment covering only his remaining months in office exposes his delusions/true intentions/dangerous pathology.
INTENTIONS:
• Burnish his legacy w/ transformational & Leftist bona fides: Security of America/world not on his radar
• Protect his legacy at all cost
• Shift balance of power in ME from the West to apocalyptic radical Islam w/ a nuclear-armed Iran & a marginalized if not vaporized Israel
• Set predicate for dishonest Leftist historians/hagiographers/professors to hold him blameless when–NB: "when," not "if"–Iran gets the bomb… and uses it
Whether recklessness w/ nukes, fraudulent “degrade & ultimately destroy ISIL,” ignoring Christian slaughter, fomenting terror globally by flaunting his radical-Islamophilic vs anti-Semitic behavior, facilitating holocaust/genocide, inciting police/military targeting, or otherwise undermining/dividing/destroying America, it is Obama lunacy couched in policy differences by both his useful idiots & the utterly useless "loyal opposition” alike.
Obama owns the post-Obama years in perpetuity.
The calculus of war has been changed forever by the nuclear arming of apocalyptic radical-Islamist terrorists not constrained by MAD.
“I’ve been very clear that Iran will not get a nuclear weapon on my watch.”
– Obama to T. Friedman
Obama's hollow commitment covering only his remaining months in office exposes his delusions/true intentions/dangerous pathology.
INTENTIONS:
• Burnish his legacy w/ transformational & Leftist bona fides: Security of America/world not on his radar
• Protect his legacy at all cost
• Shift balance of power in ME from the West to apocalyptic radical Islam w/ a nuclear-armed Iran & a marginalized if not vaporized Israel
• Set predicate for dishonest Leftist historians/hagiographers/professors to hold him blameless when–NB: "when," not "if"–Iran gets the bomb… and uses it
Whether recklessness w/ nukes, fraudulent “degrade & ultimately destroy ISIL,” ignoring Christian slaughter, fomenting terror globally by flaunting his radical-Islamophilic vs anti-Semitic behavior, facilitating holocaust/genocide, inciting police/military targeting, or otherwise undermining/dividing/destroying America, it is Obama lunacy couched in policy differences by both his useful idiots & the utterly useless "loyal opposition” alike.
Obama owns the post-Obama years in perpetuity.
Most people see the ME as a post-W mess.
"But to sustainably destroy ISIS ... the fight has to be led by Arabs and Muslims but strongly backed by America, the E.U. and, yes, Russia." Where, exactly, Mr. Friedman, are these Arab and Muslim leaders of the fight against ISIS to be found?
Seems to me I remember a fable about mice attaching the bell around a cat's neck that holds a striking resemblance to the situation in Syria today, only now we have the Arab mice employing the American and French military to do the bell-attaching work for them.
Sorry, Mr. Friedman, but until the Arabs and Muslims are willing to take a leadership role in actually fighting ISIS, the United States should limit its Syrian role to the encouragement of and the provision of armaments to those Arabs and Muslims willing to actually do the fighting, if they in fact exist. No U.S. troops on the ground, no mission creep.
Seems to me I remember a fable about mice attaching the bell around a cat's neck that holds a striking resemblance to the situation in Syria today, only now we have the Arab mice employing the American and French military to do the bell-attaching work for them.
Sorry, Mr. Friedman, but until the Arabs and Muslims are willing to take a leadership role in actually fighting ISIS, the United States should limit its Syrian role to the encouragement of and the provision of armaments to those Arabs and Muslims willing to actually do the fighting, if they in fact exist. No U.S. troops on the ground, no mission creep.
1
Tom, why is it that you and media folks like you, constantly draw our attention to Syria, Iraq and Russia? Day by day, minute by minute boko haram is wreaking havoc in Africa. No one is paying attention, as hundreds are butchered, kidnapped, enslaved, land grabbed. Do you not know that when all refugees vacate Syria and Iraq, more fighters will join from Africa, those newly trained by organizations like boko haram? There is no dearth of talent when it comes to hiring, luring, forcing more Islamic recruits. This is a force to be acknowledged. Here in the west people think in piece meal, short term, the motivation being fear and paranoia. People like you are supposed to be experts who inform the public, instead you feed into politicizing the whole crisis based on one or two personalities like Putin, Assad..you got to look beyond the region that you obsess with.
1
Take a city in the Middle East today as was done during the 2003 War in Iraq and it will not be anywhere where peace prevails but where CIA money is spent to back up militias. If we don’t stop the bleeding then no possible outcome will happen without intervention. There will be no government without having Intelligence control everything that has not been done before during the Cold War. There will be no civilization that will survive let alone exist without having the means of controlling it’s own existence and there will not be anyone who will want to lead without the support of troops to fight through the wars that have been fought already as in the past. If we go from point A to point B that leads to Victory the calculations will be the final solution as was during Adolf Hitler’s time during WWII which began with war in WWI and chemical weapons. Maybe that is what is happening now with ISIL that would take back land in order to topple the U.S. as Vladimir Putin has done in Crimea and now with his influence in Syria.
As you point out, it's almost strategically impossible to have this coalescence of so many factions uniting to defeat ISIS while also creating an order in the region to prevent ISIS from morphing into something else.
But another point you made worth noting about Putin, " Some of us thought he was just crazy" bears a closer look. With a republican candidate like Marco Rubio saying that he would " risk war with Russia to enforce a no-fly zone in Syria" presents an ominous scenario of WWIII.
A Rubio-Putin confrontation is not unlikely if a President Rubio takes over the White House.
But another point you made worth noting about Putin, " Some of us thought he was just crazy" bears a closer look. With a republican candidate like Marco Rubio saying that he would " risk war with Russia to enforce a no-fly zone in Syria" presents an ominous scenario of WWIII.
A Rubio-Putin confrontation is not unlikely if a President Rubio takes over the White House.
Interesting analysis Mr. Friedman. So why is it that only within the last several weeks has the U.S. started to bomb the truck convoys of stolen oil that ISIS exports to Turkey? Why is it that only recently, as reported in the WSJ, has the U.S. told Turkey "Enough is enough" regarding its porous borders with Syria that serve as supply depots for men and arms to ISIS? Seems to me these are a result of Russia's "misadventure" as you call it.
3
Boldly going where Friedman dares not:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/24/vladimir-putin-turkey-isis-...
Quote:
Is Vladimir Putin right to label Turkey ‘accomplices of terrorists’?
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/24/vladimir-putin-turkey-isis-...
Quote:
Is Vladimir Putin right to label Turkey ‘accomplices of terrorists’?
21
All the article proves is that turkey is appropriately named.
1
I'm told this - but how true is it?
"Arabic news
apparently the Egyptians have concluded that the bomb placed in the Russia airliner must have been placed in it before it landed in Egypt, and guess where did this plane land before Egypt? Turkey."
"Arabic news
apparently the Egyptians have concluded that the bomb placed in the Russia airliner must have been placed in it before it landed in Egypt, and guess where did this plane land before Egypt? Turkey."
7
prove it before you accuse.... Its easy for Egypt to say that since they want to belay the accusations on their poor security
1
No possibility that weak security in Egypt led to infiltration or bribery to place that bomb on the Russian plane, huh? Are you kidding?! Of course, Egypt would want to us to think that their tourist and business hub was/is totally secure. You're from New Jersey, as am I, so you're supposed to have some common sense and wisdom and a gut feeling for what's true and what isn't.
1
Based on what evidence? Seems a lot will depend upon what triggered the explosion, i.e. whether it was triggered by altitude, a timer set for 25 minutes, etc.
Of course, it would be in the Egyptians' best interest to deflect the blame to another country; it still begs the question of why it wasn't discovered in the hold of the plane if planted there when in Turkey.
I suspect that there is more to be revealed about the bomb and its origins.
Of course, it would be in the Egyptians' best interest to deflect the blame to another country; it still begs the question of why it wasn't discovered in the hold of the plane if planted there when in Turkey.
I suspect that there is more to be revealed about the bomb and its origins.
Precisely so. But, as you say, the onus is on the Muslim world, specifically Saudi Arabia and the "leading Sunni religious powers" to "aggressively delegitimize" ISIS' Islamist narrative. This is where I become pessimistic. Can, in fact, those powers denounce ISIS within the context of the religion itself? Can they, in essence, denounce jihad? If so, with the Muslim world utterly in flames, why haven't they already done so? Rhetorical, but crucial.
11
Friedman argues that to defeat ISIS you need an army led by Arabs and Muslims. Well Tom, in case you haven't been paying attention, the Saudis, who have an enormous army equipped by the United States, is sitting this out, expecting the Americans and the Europeans to fight this proxy war for them as they usually do. Not only are they sitting out the war with ISIS, they are using American military hardware to engage in a campaign of genocide against Shiites in Yemen. And, all the while they continue to export Wahabbism, the radical underpinning of ISIS ideology, and bankroll the group at every turn.
As long as the battle stays in Syria and Iraq, countries led by non-Sunnis, the Arabs will sit on the sidelines.
As long as the battle stays in Syria and Iraq, countries led by non-Sunnis, the Arabs will sit on the sidelines.
236
These murderers do not represent the teachings of the prophet Muhamad
so.
Let all of us...now refer to these murderers ...these outlaws of this great
religion...as Daesh aka Terrorists who have usurped the name Islamists.
so.
Let all of us...now refer to these murderers ...these outlaws of this great
religion...as Daesh aka Terrorists who have usurped the name Islamists.
Peter: Agreed. All support to the Saudis needs to come to an end. At the very least the tribal families sitting at the top of their political pyramid should be summarily removed. Since 9/11, and even before, they've been fulminating regional and global chaos in the name of advancing their religious agenda, aided and abetted by the fortunes of holding a key resource to our civilization. So they need to be removed from the global economic stage. But how likely is that so long as they sit on an ocean of oil, eh?
Millions of Moderate Muslims in Indonesia, Malaysia and India have an opportunity to confront the ugliness and darkness within Islam and reject it. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/indonesian-muslims-counter-isis_565c...
If they have the will and the right motive to help humanity.
If they have the will and the right motive to help humanity.
1
Normally friedman writes sensible article and well researched. In this case he lost it completely. Russia is in syria for two reasons. 1. Do not let US using ISS to forment terroism in russia to topple putin. 2. By opening second front against NATO and keep everyone busy to buy time few years for russia to get out of sanctions issue. Russia need few billions for their nuke submarines. it can not be built over night. They need atleast 20 years of nuke submarine building to even tap USA. At present putin need conflicts everywhere so russia can buy time. USA wants to own russia like they own europe. Putin knows who funds ISS ( it is DA USA through turkey and saudis). Putin just play ignorance because that is what is needed.
5
If the USA "owns" Europe, the Europeans seem pretty happy about it. How are the Russian people doing?
1
I'm guessing that by ISS you mean ISIS, also known as the Islamic State? Do you mean to say that the US backs ISIS? As a means to get at Russia? Take off your tinfoil hat.
Mr. Friedman correctly identifies the source of much of the problems in the Middle east to the conflict between Sunni-Shiite Muslims.
He notes that the Saudis have to delegitimize ISIS's narrative and that Iran has to encourage the Iraqi and others to share power. This is a false equivalence that makes for a column in the NYT and no more. The source of all extremism lies in the Wahabism that is supported and exported by the Saudis. Just a few days back Mr. Friedman wrote a column praising the Saudis for opening their society. He was wrong that day and he is wrong today.
He notes that the Saudis have to delegitimize ISIS's narrative and that Iran has to encourage the Iraqi and others to share power. This is a false equivalence that makes for a column in the NYT and no more. The source of all extremism lies in the Wahabism that is supported and exported by the Saudis. Just a few days back Mr. Friedman wrote a column praising the Saudis for opening their society. He was wrong that day and he is wrong today.
70
So, what are your solutions to the Saudi problem?
Tom, if solutions leading to the destruction ISIS are dependent on the last four "needs" paragraphs of your interesting article, the world is in serious and unsolvable trouble. In fact, just mentioning rapport between Sunni and Shiite faiths brings progress to a halt.
Seeking solutions from our collection of very questionable Republican candidates is utterly pointless too.
In the best of all worlds, an agreement between the United States, the EU and NATO, and Russia might be possible but the world should not hold it breath. It will indeed take a village.
Seeking solutions from our collection of very questionable Republican candidates is utterly pointless too.
In the best of all worlds, an agreement between the United States, the EU and NATO, and Russia might be possible but the world should not hold it breath. It will indeed take a village.
8
Let us at least agree that the name ISIS or ISIL...should be not used in the
reference to the terrorists in Syrian, Iraq and Lybia..and elsewhere world-wide
....These terrorists are not upholding the teachings
of the Koran...they are simply thugs...and should be referred to as "DAESH"
(pronounced Dy.esh) and this name Daesh..should be the ONLY name to
refer to these phonies who say they are creating a Caliphate....they are simply
thugs...and in no way represent the teachings of the prophet Muhammad.
so Editors and journalist please...stop including the great religion of Islam...in referring to these murderers.
reference to the terrorists in Syrian, Iraq and Lybia..and elsewhere world-wide
....These terrorists are not upholding the teachings
of the Koran...they are simply thugs...and should be referred to as "DAESH"
(pronounced Dy.esh) and this name Daesh..should be the ONLY name to
refer to these phonies who say they are creating a Caliphate....they are simply
thugs...and in no way represent the teachings of the prophet Muhammad.
so Editors and journalist please...stop including the great religion of Islam...in referring to these murderers.
6
What are you talking about? Have you ever read the Koran or studied the so-called prophet Mohammad? These people are just fulfilling their duties as they are directed through their scriptures. Wake up folks.
1
Nonsense. Isis needs to be called what they are Militant Islamic Jihadis terrorists. There is no reason to think that you are denigrating Islam by calling them what they are. Islam has 1.5 billion people and Isis are there very bad apples.
It is useless to insist that the ideology of the Islamic State has nothing to do with Islam. It is a radical, violent offshoot of Islam. One might as well argue that the Crusades or the Inquisition had nothing to do with Christianity.
I am sure I am not alone in saying what I have been saying for....two decades. There will never be peace in the Middle East until the Sunni/Shia Civil War happens and one side wins. To me that is the culmination of 1700 years of hate each other have for the other
2
ISIS, writes Friedman, is "the product of two civil wars; one was between moderate and extremist Sunnis and the other was between Sunnis and Shiites. And they feed each other."
Why not give credit to whom credit is due, Mr. Friedman? ISIS is the product of George Bush's invasion of Iraq.
Why not give credit to whom credit is due, Mr. Friedman? ISIS is the product of George Bush's invasion of Iraq.
145
Well, just to make explicit what you no doubt already know, Tom Friedman was an enthusiastic supporter of George Bush's invasion of Iraq. That's why he disappears from TF's account of the matter.
1
Agreed Dorota. But let's not forget that Mr. Friedman was a culpable, staunch supporter of that Bush invasion of Iraq.
1
Putin has had mis-adventures of late. He is not a master of the Universe. Russia is shrinking in GDP terms. It is now smaller than Australia or Italy in terms of its economy. Russia's GDP is $1.2 Trillion compared to the United States's almost $18 Trillion.
More bad news is coming Russia's way.....We start shipping liquid natural gas to Europe ..soon,very soon.
More bad news is coming Russia's way.....We start shipping liquid natural gas to Europe ..soon,very soon.
10
"In sum, Putin’s “crafty” Syrian chess move has left him with a lot more dead Russians; newly at odds with Turkey and Iran; weakened in Ukraine; acting as the defense lawyer for Assad — a mass murderer of Sunni Muslims, the same Sunni Muslims as Putin has in Russia; and with no real advances against ISIS."
Republicans and Fox News have a passionate love affair with Putin. I am sure they all have posters in their bedrooms prominently displayed, showing him riding a horse bare chested. When you compare his strength to the weak and ineffectual Obama it is embarrassing. And perhaps that is their point. Thanks for keeping a real world scorecard showing where Putin's actions have gotten him thus far.
Republicans and Fox News have a passionate love affair with Putin. I am sure they all have posters in their bedrooms prominently displayed, showing him riding a horse bare chested. When you compare his strength to the weak and ineffectual Obama it is embarrassing. And perhaps that is their point. Thanks for keeping a real world scorecard showing where Putin's actions have gotten him thus far.
6
On the contrary - I believe that in 10 years Obama's approach to this problem will be seen as the best one possible. People criticize Obama for being "weak", but all the "strong" alternatives are far worse than his approach.
2
The only impossibility in this situation is one created by failure of the EU to sanction Turkey and its role in not curtailing ISIS within its borders, while, indeed, at the same time, pushing out of Turkey, m0derate, secular, Muslims such as Hizmet.
To tag Obama as weak in an impossible situation without explaining that it is the EU's weak and appeasing policies towards Turkey which are creating the 'impossibility' this article intones creates fact by narrative.
So. How long can the U.S. ignore Turkey's role in the instability that permeates its relationship with the Kurds and the Syrians? Eg.: Its ant-democratic purging of political opponents to the AK Party in 2014 bolstered ISIS and its Turkish presence. And most recently we have the well-placed rumor of Turkey's military violation of Cyprus airspace; and that certainly is lurking in the minds of those who must manage NATO and the EU.
What exactly is Obama supposed to do? The EU, not NATO, controls Turkey's political space in the region. The U.S. doesn't. I would say offhand that he's doing a pretty good job.
To tag Obama as weak in an impossible situation without explaining that it is the EU's weak and appeasing policies towards Turkey which are creating the 'impossibility' this article intones creates fact by narrative.
So. How long can the U.S. ignore Turkey's role in the instability that permeates its relationship with the Kurds and the Syrians? Eg.: Its ant-democratic purging of political opponents to the AK Party in 2014 bolstered ISIS and its Turkish presence. And most recently we have the well-placed rumor of Turkey's military violation of Cyprus airspace; and that certainly is lurking in the minds of those who must manage NATO and the EU.
What exactly is Obama supposed to do? The EU, not NATO, controls Turkey's political space in the region. The U.S. doesn't. I would say offhand that he's doing a pretty good job.
20
Friedman's complicated recipe to defeat ISIL is "Exhibit A" on why we shouldn't be there and why our intervention is actually making matters worse, just like the Iraq War in 2003 made matters worse.
We never learn, because this time it's "different".
We continue to think present circumstances (ISIL) are exceptional and do not apply to lessons learned from the past (Iraq invasion). We learned that we shouldn't have bombed and invaded Iraq, but now we call for exactly that, because this time, it's different.
We do not consider that our bombing of Sunnis in Iraq and Syria are creating sympathy, unity and strength for ISIL leaders. Now, they can much more easily control populations in their geographical area. The Americans are bombing us! Unify! It's a song older than Machiavelli.
ISIL, a sunni extremist organization, based in Western Iraq and Eastern Syria, will fall under its own weight if we learn to let it fail instead of propping it up by exerting an outside coalescing force. Give the people who live under ISIL the chance, the breather, to actually examine their new government, instead of dodging foreign bombs.
We might be surprised, they might topple ISIL all on their own.
We never learn, because this time it's "different".
We continue to think present circumstances (ISIL) are exceptional and do not apply to lessons learned from the past (Iraq invasion). We learned that we shouldn't have bombed and invaded Iraq, but now we call for exactly that, because this time, it's different.
We do not consider that our bombing of Sunnis in Iraq and Syria are creating sympathy, unity and strength for ISIL leaders. Now, they can much more easily control populations in their geographical area. The Americans are bombing us! Unify! It's a song older than Machiavelli.
ISIL, a sunni extremist organization, based in Western Iraq and Eastern Syria, will fall under its own weight if we learn to let it fail instead of propping it up by exerting an outside coalescing force. Give the people who live under ISIL the chance, the breather, to actually examine their new government, instead of dodging foreign bombs.
We might be surprised, they might topple ISIL all on their own.
8
I am thankful Putin was so clear headed to understand Obama had to try to defang the American neo-conservatives as this could have been a very serious problem. The American right-wing wants war so bad. There is a lot of money to be made in war and their sons and grandsons (not to mention the women) don't have to fight.
11
Mr. Friedman has his three points what he thinks is needed to sustainably defeat ISIS. Since a major cause of the successes of ISIS is that in Iraq and Syria the Sunnis have been deprived most of their political rights lately, I would instead suggest something else to aim a sustainable defeat of ISIS:
1. Transform Iraq into a federation of a Shia, a Sunni, and a Kurd state.
2. Transform Syria into a federation of an Alavite and a Sunni state.
1. Transform Iraq into a federation of a Shia, a Sunni, and a Kurd state.
2. Transform Syria into a federation of an Alavite and a Sunni state.
1
Sort of typical Thomas Friedman, he turned the extremely difficult situation into the impossible event. Or the saga of Two Bushes in the hand being worth less than one bird in the bush.(Kidding) But seriously the options are limited. Who wants to go fight and die for this cause? Adrenaline junkies, kung fu freaks, masochists or sadists are all I can think of. A new Republican Guard, ala Spanish Civil War might be the ticket. Oops, that's illegal isn't it? Guess we will just have to keep using our resources to fight a war that truly is an Arab issue. So no matter how many books you write, widgets you crunch out or toxic CDO's you stick in Moms and Dad portfolio you are in it to the death, so help you god.
3
Nice attack on Putin. But what about Obama's numerous missteps in the region? When those actions are analyzed and criticized and put into the same frame, Putin's action don't seem so bad. At least he has a plan(s).
13
Obama's plan is to keep the U.S. at a sufficient arms' length for the region's regimes to (eventually) realize this mess is inescapably their problem and one that will never be solved without their good-faith efforts. In the short-term, this approach may create more problems -- including allowing Russia to dive into the breach (although chances are that Putin is already having second thoughts). But in the longer term, a solution that requires aggressive U.S. military involvement and expensive diplomatic arm-twisting for the indefinite future is not a solution. Obama, unlike most of his critics, recognizes this. U.S. interests are hurt by ongoing conflict in the Middle East, but the U.S. is not directly threatened, and so I believe Obama's policy can and should be allowed to continue. It may yet work -- and the alternative of jumping in and stamping out some fires while igniting many more, and meanwhile sowing anger and hatred of the U.S. everywhere in the region, is absolutely not a real solution.
Obama has not handled an impossible situation badly. He has avoided the temptation to fix the unfixable, with the attendant loss of American lives, and has elected to wait for the many other parties involved to come around. He knows that it may be a long wait but that America's best interests are served by being patient.
399
Obama's "patience" is probably the most significant contributing factor to the continued civil war in Syria, the ISIS entrenchment in Iraq and the mass exodus of civilians who have landed on europe's doorstep and are about to knock on America's door. I wonder what other fallout will result from Obama's stick your head in the sand ( aka, being patient) leadership model?
"... America's best interests are served by being patient." Whoa. There's a new and different approach. No wonder the right wing's upset with Obama: no bash and bomb it foreign policy, ostensibly at least.
1
Yes. Obama has the intellectual maturity to observe and build a strategy. But there's also something else he does well. He keeps his moves confidential, at least some of the time (bin Laden) What I never understand is announcing what we intend to do, i.e., by some date we are pulling out, going in, etc. Why ever do we do this? I want to know we have reduced effective terrorism AFTER the fact!
3
It's easy to be a critic. Freedman's analysis here is right on and exactly what Obama is trying to do. This is not a job done badly but strategic and long term. Pressure and allowing the Muslims to solve their own problems will eventually kill ISIS.
32
It's a horror movie gone amuck. SA's Frankenstein versus Iran's Vampire.
They unleashed these monsters and now can not control them. Angry mobs
with pitchforks and torches are ineffective in reining them in. So what can
the good citizens of Transalvania do?
They unleashed these monsters and now can not control them. Angry mobs
with pitchforks and torches are ineffective in reining them in. So what can
the good citizens of Transalvania do?
In other words, no one knows how to resolve this incredibly complex and dangerous situation.
Ultimately, the solution to ISIS lies with the surrounding nations and the Muslim population.
Ultimately, the solution to ISIS lies with the surrounding nations and the Muslim population.
6
Thanks for a reasonable explanation of a fine mess, with no easy solution.
The mess wasn't created overnight, has multiple origin points and will take generations to improve.
The only people who say there's a quick fix are either not paying attention -- or they're running for the GOP presidential nomination.
The mess wasn't created overnight, has multiple origin points and will take generations to improve.
The only people who say there's a quick fix are either not paying attention -- or they're running for the GOP presidential nomination.
9
Finding fault with Russia’s first experience in Syria fails in comparison with what we have accomplished. Having committed ourselves to regime change, the promise of removing Bashar al-Asad has only led to a bloody civil war. Contrary to Mr. Friedman’s blanket accusation of tens of thousands of civilians killed by Asad, two-thirds of the recorded deaths are combatants. The remaining civilian deaths not only include those killed by loyalists but also by rebel forces. Our efforts to create a moderate rebel force has been met with repeated failure. These forces have been eliminated by the jihadists like the Nusra Front, been absorbed by them or just melted into the background. What has occurred is that advanced American weaponry are now in the hands of al Qaeda. Moscow’s losses may cause Mr. Putin some reflection, but compared to American causalities since the ill-fated 2003 Iraq invasion as well as the expenditure of over a trillion dollars, Mr. Putin’s effort pales in comparison.
30
First paragraph of this op-Ed can be applied to ALL of Dubya's misadventures too.
8
Although Mr. Friedman makes some good points, I think he makes the same mistake that many Western observers do when viewing the events currently unfolding in the Middle East.
In talking about everybody in the region forming a coalition against ISIS, he is still viewing what is happening as a War on ISIS. But that's not how the regional players see unfolding events. Saudi Arabia sees a encroachment by Iran. Iran sees itself as rising to the defense of Shiites against Sunnis. Kurds see this as a chance at statehood, while Turkey sees the chaos as a dangerous opportunity for Kurdish nationalism and for its old enemy Russia to interject itself in the region. Russia wants to bolster a long-time ally, while preventing the fires of Jiahdism from spreading back into Chechnya.
Mr. Friedman talks about how to beat ISIS, but the regional players aren't interested in that as much as how to beat each other. How do you build a coalition against ISIS, when these would-be partners see each other as the real threats?
Our Western focus on "War on ISIS" is myopic, because for the regional players, the real war is much bigger. They are fighting to shape their region according to their conflicting visions.
In talking about everybody in the region forming a coalition against ISIS, he is still viewing what is happening as a War on ISIS. But that's not how the regional players see unfolding events. Saudi Arabia sees a encroachment by Iran. Iran sees itself as rising to the defense of Shiites against Sunnis. Kurds see this as a chance at statehood, while Turkey sees the chaos as a dangerous opportunity for Kurdish nationalism and for its old enemy Russia to interject itself in the region. Russia wants to bolster a long-time ally, while preventing the fires of Jiahdism from spreading back into Chechnya.
Mr. Friedman talks about how to beat ISIS, but the regional players aren't interested in that as much as how to beat each other. How do you build a coalition against ISIS, when these would-be partners see each other as the real threats?
Our Western focus on "War on ISIS" is myopic, because for the regional players, the real war is much bigger. They are fighting to shape their region according to their conflicting visions.
254
Let's be real....it is Daesh...not in anyway resemblance to Islam ...
so
let's start getting in the habit of calling this terrorist treachery what it is..
An outlaw organization...and in no what a caliphate which is taking control
of oil...and lives in the Middle East...This is NOT ISLAM...
Please words do matter Editors..and Journalists...and ...so..please EDIT
and PLEASE be specific about words...words do matter Tom Friedman
IT IS DAESH....please imprint this in your head from now on...
so
let's start getting in the habit of calling this terrorist treachery what it is..
An outlaw organization...and in no what a caliphate which is taking control
of oil...and lives in the Middle East...This is NOT ISLAM...
Please words do matter Editors..and Journalists...and ...so..please EDIT
and PLEASE be specific about words...words do matter Tom Friedman
IT IS DAESH....please imprint this in your head from now on...
Daesh...not anything to do with Islam...
Please take this into consideration...and stop offending Muslims...by equating
these opportunistic fake Muslims....with the fine aspirations of Islam...
Muhammad did NOT advocate plunder and murder...so stop please stop
referring to the terrorists as Muslims....
Please take this into consideration...and stop offending Muslims...by equating
these opportunistic fake Muslims....with the fine aspirations of Islam...
Muhammad did NOT advocate plunder and murder...so stop please stop
referring to the terrorists as Muslims....
Thank-you. This is very insightful and yes, an inconvenient truth.
I am really impressed with the depth of analysis given by this writer in not only this article but also a few before as well
2
Subject Mater Expert Friedman is @ it again
Putin is having a misadventure in Syria
But Friedman, Bush, and the neo-cons zionists holy jihad in Iraq was a resounding success
Let’s all gave a big thumbs up to SME Friedman for his valuable strategic thinking!
Putin is having a misadventure in Syria
But Friedman, Bush, and the neo-cons zionists holy jihad in Iraq was a resounding success
Let’s all gave a big thumbs up to SME Friedman for his valuable strategic thinking!
18
With a few exceptions, Friedman's plan is also Sanders' plan, which is an extension of Obama's plan.
Every coalition and political agreement is impossible...until it is not. The Iran nuclear deal was "impossible" for the longest time.
That Friedman says a multi-player Syrian deal is impossible doesn't make it less than the best plan. Keep our soldiers alive and as much out of harm's way as possible until the regional powers and local stakeholders accept that the US is really not going to fight their wars for them anymore. That the US is partly responsible for the situation in Syria won't make that position so easy to defend. Some say it is "impossible" for us to avoid sending ground troops. But we have to try or we'll be at war for ever.
We've already started down the road to "possible" by not "diving in the middle". Now we just have to stick to the plan.
Every coalition and political agreement is impossible...until it is not. The Iran nuclear deal was "impossible" for the longest time.
That Friedman says a multi-player Syrian deal is impossible doesn't make it less than the best plan. Keep our soldiers alive and as much out of harm's way as possible until the regional powers and local stakeholders accept that the US is really not going to fight their wars for them anymore. That the US is partly responsible for the situation in Syria won't make that position so easy to defend. Some say it is "impossible" for us to avoid sending ground troops. But we have to try or we'll be at war for ever.
We've already started down the road to "possible" by not "diving in the middle". Now we just have to stick to the plan.
4
wow .... "to agree to a political transition in Syria that would eventually replace Assad." a great idea!
so replace by ??? by a new dictatorship (as in Egypt), or by a new failed state (as in Libya), or ? make your picks, Gentlemen!
so replace by ??? by a new dictatorship (as in Egypt), or by a new failed state (as in Libya), or ? make your picks, Gentlemen!
11
This is one of Mr. Friedman's best columns, because it comes closest to reality. Most if not all of the conditions he cites "to sustainably defeat ISIS" will never happen. We need to kick the habit of trying to be the World Cop.
Also, ISIS is still the jihadist “J.V. team” when it comes to killing Americans. They killed fewer Americans than Al Qaeda, and they are killing fewer Americans than that other ideological gang of criminals, the Mafia. Ditto the American gun manufacturers, who trade in death for profit.
The best way for the United States and Europe to deal with ISIS is to ignore it, and secure our borders. Then ISIS would lose support and wither on the vine. It would also help if the news media stopped hyping ISIS and turned its attention to "good news" instead.
Also, ISIS is still the jihadist “J.V. team” when it comes to killing Americans. They killed fewer Americans than Al Qaeda, and they are killing fewer Americans than that other ideological gang of criminals, the Mafia. Ditto the American gun manufacturers, who trade in death for profit.
The best way for the United States and Europe to deal with ISIS is to ignore it, and secure our borders. Then ISIS would lose support and wither on the vine. It would also help if the news media stopped hyping ISIS and turned its attention to "good news" instead.
1
The Syrian/ISIS, Putin problem is far more complex than what is written in Thomas L.
Friedman's column. There are many states and individuals that Friedman does
not mention like Israel, Turkey, Egypt. the E.U., the Muslim states, and Iran.
All have stakes and strategies in this region. There are multiple strategies without a single solution. Back to 1919. Sorry, one column will not do.
Friedman's column. There are many states and individuals that Friedman does
not mention like Israel, Turkey, Egypt. the E.U., the Muslim states, and Iran.
All have stakes and strategies in this region. There are multiple strategies without a single solution. Back to 1919. Sorry, one column will not do.
4
No mention here of the economic hardship which is a corollary of global and regional income inequality as the driving factor for the thousands of hopeless furious disaffected Muslim recruits. Profound religious and cultural tensions do not need to provoke murderous and insane consequences. The same corporate and wealth structures inhibiting/strangling the American and European dreams along with their democracies produce hardships, in conjunction with corrupt regional leadership, that are at the heart of the Isis and Al Qaeda crises.
1
In spite of Vladimir Putin’s blunders, Turkey’s agenda of fighting ISIS on limited terms, Iran’s support for the Alawites and the Kurds’ overriding desire for their own state, the hodge-podge of forces fighting ISIS is winning. ISIS is on the ropes, and we must finish the job.
We must stop acting surprised that there is a deadly fighting machine of radical jihadists in Syria, when we – America – created ISIS. Everyone who supported the Iraq war to remove Saddam Hussein knew that the Shiite majority would ascend to power in his place. They did not know Americans would foolishly deny all former Baathists a place in the Iraq military and civil service and send them on their way – armed to the teeth – to become the leadership of and brains behind ISIS.
America and its allies – including a wiser Russia -- need to intensify our military effort in Syria and wherever we find ISIS. Regardless of our hesitation to commit American troops, our special forces are needed, because air power will not be enough.
The largest barrier to our success is the one people don’t want to talk about – Saudi Arabia. We must end the financial aid flowing from Saudi sources to ISIS. The aid includes radical madrasas and training grounds in Saudi Arabia; Saudi imams sent to European mosques to exhort young men to enlist in ISIS; sponsoring and producing jihadist programs on radio and television across the Middle East and elsewhere.
We can depend upon Saudi Arabia for nothing – other than trouble.
We must stop acting surprised that there is a deadly fighting machine of radical jihadists in Syria, when we – America – created ISIS. Everyone who supported the Iraq war to remove Saddam Hussein knew that the Shiite majority would ascend to power in his place. They did not know Americans would foolishly deny all former Baathists a place in the Iraq military and civil service and send them on their way – armed to the teeth – to become the leadership of and brains behind ISIS.
America and its allies – including a wiser Russia -- need to intensify our military effort in Syria and wherever we find ISIS. Regardless of our hesitation to commit American troops, our special forces are needed, because air power will not be enough.
The largest barrier to our success is the one people don’t want to talk about – Saudi Arabia. We must end the financial aid flowing from Saudi sources to ISIS. The aid includes radical madrasas and training grounds in Saudi Arabia; Saudi imams sent to European mosques to exhort young men to enlist in ISIS; sponsoring and producing jihadist programs on radio and television across the Middle East and elsewhere.
We can depend upon Saudi Arabia for nothing – other than trouble.
143
The author of this article is clearly biased.But i must say i am not surprised as most Americans are brainwashed by their media propaganda.He assumes that rebellion is not financed and backed by Turkey,Saudi Arabia,Qatar and USA.You cannot fight terrorism and at the same time collaborate the fight with people who support terrorism.He also assumes the advances made by the Syrian Regime Army and the numerous rebels who have surrendered.As we are speaking Homs is about to be fully controlled by the Syrian government after the rebels brokered a deal with them to leave that city because they saw it was just a matter of time they be killed!!
8
"Whereas Putin’s goals are uncertain, and perhaps limited to protecting a truncated Assad regime"
Putin works hard to keep Assad the butcher in power, and is willing to pay the price for it.
Does anyone know what are the goals on US and Nato?
Can anyone explain how these goals will be reached?
It seems more and more there are no goals and there is no policy.
Why not just admit it?
Putin works hard to keep Assad the butcher in power, and is willing to pay the price for it.
Does anyone know what are the goals on US and Nato?
Can anyone explain how these goals will be reached?
It seems more and more there are no goals and there is no policy.
Why not just admit it?
3
This narrative:
. And 3) the fight has to be led by Arabs and Muslims but strongly backed by America, the E.U. and, yes, Russia.
Looks for me a wishful thinking.Turkey has been the real supportive side of ISIS by allowing the free flow of oil into their territory and the kind of tourist border with Syria allowing bandits to cross back and forth into Syria from EU and vice versa where trained men and guns have full freedom of movement.
Then when looks like everybody is getting together looking for a solution Turkey decided to face Russia bringing more tension to the talks.
If this is an ally I would like to ask: Who needs an enemy?
. And 3) the fight has to be led by Arabs and Muslims but strongly backed by America, the E.U. and, yes, Russia.
Looks for me a wishful thinking.Turkey has been the real supportive side of ISIS by allowing the free flow of oil into their territory and the kind of tourist border with Syria allowing bandits to cross back and forth into Syria from EU and vice versa where trained men and guns have full freedom of movement.
Then when looks like everybody is getting together looking for a solution Turkey decided to face Russia bringing more tension to the talks.
If this is an ally I would like to ask: Who needs an enemy?
5
No offense Thomas but none of your ideas have proven credible over the long term, beginning with the war in Iraq you promoted which led us into this nightmare:nor does your constant criticism of Putin who along with Iran look good now compared to Desh which evolved as a direct result of your last good idea. I also find it disingenuous to put it nicely that you are still trying to spin the U.S. Israeli backed coup of Ukraines duly elected government by a group of Russian Jewish oligarchs and trying to pass them off as scrappy little freedom fighters. That you and who ever you are schilling for would try and drag America into another of your wars of choice is despicable, haven't enough young Americans died for oil and Israel? Our President is trying to do the right thing and given the hand he was dealt and the pressure from aipac and the neocons I feel he has performed admirably, Europe as you correctly point out is stumbling along trying to clean up and pay for the mess you and your friends created. The Schengen agreement will probably be dissolved out of necessity and the European Union as we know it is forever changed. For a peek behind the curtain you only have too extrapolate from yesterday's excellent article (in th F.T) on the 500,000 wealthy Italians now living in London as a result of your War of choice in Iraq and equally damaging your" world is flat" ethos of globalization that is turning both America and much of Europe into banana republics. Heck of a job Tom.
11
Wow. Kudos to Ted for this courageous comment.
1
Long may Tom Friedman reign at the Times! I read him and always gain a fresh, intelligent perspective.
2
The problem here is that Tom and most other commentators do not realize what ISIS really is. One needs to examine what ISIS is against. It is against foreigners because of their historical misdeeds in the Arab/Moslem world. It is against royals and dictators from Saudi kings to Asad that are imposing their rule on the Arabs and Moslems. In spite of its inhumane and disgusting methods ISIS represents the desires and dreams of the Arab and Moslem people. The more we attack ISIS, the more it's attraction in the region grows. Even if ISIS is defeated militarily, it's ideas will survive. We need to out of the Middle East completely and let the Arabs and Moslems decide for themselves what they need to do. We cannot, just blindly go after ISIS without considering the consequences of our actions. The more we attack ISIS the more we shall pay the price in Paris, London or or New York.
51
Inequality between nations, within nations, is the crux of the problem. Western European nations have historically colonized Africa, Asia, Latin America, their motives being: #1 Greed: "Wealth-gold/silver, Religious Freedom (Pilgrims, Puritans, quakers), Mercantilism ($$$) from trade, land sales, and fishing, Expand Trade, Political Freedom, Home for debtors/criminals." No to mention, Power, spread of western values, missionary work.
Prior to european colonialism, Muslim and Arab traders and rulers spread all over continents (except the Americas). The Ottoman Empire being the zenith of glory years. http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/book/islam-9780195107999/isl...
Neither Christianity's nor Islam's promises of all children of God, love thy neighbors, embrace all etc etc...brought equality, justice, freedom to all. On the other hand the Church exploited the people, the Islamic clerics brainwashed and incited hatred among Muslim followers (converted or born Muslim). Today, in 2015 what we are witnessing is the failure of the political and power structures of centuries of misrule, of divide and conquer, of forceful conversions, of "my way" and "your way". Westerners are either smug about "own Judeo-Christian values" or completely dismissive of "the others, those, them". There is no middle ground. We see the same developing in America's own political system, radicalization of minds.
Prior to european colonialism, Muslim and Arab traders and rulers spread all over continents (except the Americas). The Ottoman Empire being the zenith of glory years. http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/book/islam-9780195107999/isl...
Neither Christianity's nor Islam's promises of all children of God, love thy neighbors, embrace all etc etc...brought equality, justice, freedom to all. On the other hand the Church exploited the people, the Islamic clerics brainwashed and incited hatred among Muslim followers (converted or born Muslim). Today, in 2015 what we are witnessing is the failure of the political and power structures of centuries of misrule, of divide and conquer, of forceful conversions, of "my way" and "your way". Westerners are either smug about "own Judeo-Christian values" or completely dismissive of "the others, those, them". There is no middle ground. We see the same developing in America's own political system, radicalization of minds.
1
What we really need to do, American, is examine the minds of the people (men - and their enslaved women) of ISIS. They're not fighting because of historic misdeeds by the West in the Middle East, they're grown men acting out adolescent fantasies of machismo, using the Koran as license to misbehave, and their women are dishrags for their men suffering from Stockholm Syndrome.
IMO, in an ideal world, most of the conflicts haunting humanity can be diagnosed - and maybe treated - from the psychiatrist's couch. We decry the problems without fully understanding the real reasons for them. Can we grow up and get a panel of psychiatrists to diagnose the causes of ISIS, and not rely on our machismo to fight their machismo?
IMO, in an ideal world, most of the conflicts haunting humanity can be diagnosed - and maybe treated - from the psychiatrist's couch. We decry the problems without fully understanding the real reasons for them. Can we grow up and get a panel of psychiatrists to diagnose the causes of ISIS, and not rely on our machismo to fight their machismo?
"even if ISIS is defeated militarily, it's ideas will survive." Right, with maybe many more Muslims becoming self-radicalized. Blowing up malls, restaurants, hotels and concerts doesn't take the resources of a landed state.
Typically I think you are spot on with your Middle East analysis. But today , I must respectfully disagree. Putin is seen as taking action against a grave and present threat to his people and the world. He did it after Obama and by extension the US did nothing for more than 2 years. It is clear Obama mistook, underestimated and erred in his evaluation of ISIS and in dealing with the clear and present danger they pose. He drew lines in the sand and then vacillated and abandoned them and by extension our allies, the rebels, the Syrian refugees and the world. When the Prime Minister of France looks strong and like a forceful leader in comparison to the President of the United States you need not say more. As each day passes it clear that the President had and still has no plan to combat ISIS , has not implemented or devised a coherent strategy and insults the world by stubbornly refusing to refer to them as ISIS and Islamic terrorists. Sometimes being the smartest guy in the room isn't quite enough.
3
1. Have the courage to stand up to Saudi Arabia and make them stop their direct and indirect support for Sunni Islamists in the Middle East and elsewhere.
2. Have the courage to stand up to Turkey and make them stop their fight against the Kurds, make them stop buying ISIS oil and make them stop western Jihadists enter into Syria.
3. Have the courage to stand up to the Bagdad government and force them to include Sunnies in their ranks and ensure empowerment and security to the Sunny population.
4. Have the courage to leverage the relative "thaw" with Iran to ensure they step up their fight against ISIS in exchange for a proper and respected seat at the international conference on the future of Syria.
5. Have the courage to stand up to Israel and enforce a peace deal that creates a Palestinian state, thereby removing the single most important strand in the common narrative of Jihadists around the world.
6. Have the courage to admit that the mothers of civilian victims of western bombs in the Middle East feel the exact same sorrow as the mothers of the Nov. 13 victims in Paris.
7. Have the courage to stop listening to opinion leader who were so strongly in favor of the invasion of Iraq in 2003.
2. Have the courage to stand up to Turkey and make them stop their fight against the Kurds, make them stop buying ISIS oil and make them stop western Jihadists enter into Syria.
3. Have the courage to stand up to the Bagdad government and force them to include Sunnies in their ranks and ensure empowerment and security to the Sunny population.
4. Have the courage to leverage the relative "thaw" with Iran to ensure they step up their fight against ISIS in exchange for a proper and respected seat at the international conference on the future of Syria.
5. Have the courage to stand up to Israel and enforce a peace deal that creates a Palestinian state, thereby removing the single most important strand in the common narrative of Jihadists around the world.
6. Have the courage to admit that the mothers of civilian victims of western bombs in the Middle East feel the exact same sorrow as the mothers of the Nov. 13 victims in Paris.
7. Have the courage to stop listening to opinion leader who were so strongly in favor of the invasion of Iraq in 2003.
62
You honestly believe "solving" the Israel-Palestine issue would signifcantly lessen juhadism world-wide? Please!
4
Why are we served such prescriptive fantasies by a person who thinks to be a wise analyst? This article is replete with the inane platitudes and delusional grandeur of a wandering mind.
9
I think you and the rest of the media have over-estimated ISIS, and thereby empowered them beyond where they could have got on their own. In fact they have never controlled important territory, they only control marginal areas that the other players don't want to bother with. True, they carry out lots of dramatic executions, but I think they will soon be a memory, like Donald Trump, their American counterpart.
And you hope to "minimize the struggle between Sunnis and Shiites," but I think that is wishful thinking. That struggle is central to all the problems in the Mideast now. They want to fight it out and decide who is in charge of what. They cannot settle that because outside players, with vaster resources, keep interfering. Imagine if the US had been interrupted in the buildup to and prosecution of our Civil War by outside forces that were vastly more powerful. Would that have helped us?
And you hope to "minimize the struggle between Sunnis and Shiites," but I think that is wishful thinking. That struggle is central to all the problems in the Mideast now. They want to fight it out and decide who is in charge of what. They cannot settle that because outside players, with vaster resources, keep interfering. Imagine if the US had been interrupted in the buildup to and prosecution of our Civil War by outside forces that were vastly more powerful. Would that have helped us?
4
Friedman seems to be in a state of amnesic confusion today.
What are Putin's goals? To keep a military base in the Mediterranean.
Russia newly at odds with Turkey? Clear the haze of WW2 and you will discover that the main military adversary of Russia was Turkey in the form of the Ottoman empire for centuries. Centuries. Russia was inviting German settlers while battling the Ottomans for control of the Black Sea.
Russia's other major enemy? Iran. Maybe the confusion here is also about the name change. Russia fought multiple wars against Iran d/b/a Persia for the Caucasus region. In the end, Russia and Britain agreed to share colonial dominance over the defeated Persians.
But most mystifying of all is the expectation that Saudi Arabia will do anything at all that is helpful. If you want to strengthen moderate Sunnis against extremists, you should run screaming from Saudi Arabia. After oil, extremist Sunni theology is Saudi Arabia's major export.
While it is said that ISIS wouldn't exist if not for the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, and there is some truth to that, ISIS also would not exist if Saudi Arabia hadn't spent the last hundred years spewing its extremist violent for of Islam.
Saudi Arabia would never ever delegitimize ISIS's narrative because its rulers believe in the same narrative.
One day when the oil runs out, our grandchildren will view our support of Saudi Arabia the way we view our history of slavery. A vile evil that we pretended was necessary for too long
What are Putin's goals? To keep a military base in the Mediterranean.
Russia newly at odds with Turkey? Clear the haze of WW2 and you will discover that the main military adversary of Russia was Turkey in the form of the Ottoman empire for centuries. Centuries. Russia was inviting German settlers while battling the Ottomans for control of the Black Sea.
Russia's other major enemy? Iran. Maybe the confusion here is also about the name change. Russia fought multiple wars against Iran d/b/a Persia for the Caucasus region. In the end, Russia and Britain agreed to share colonial dominance over the defeated Persians.
But most mystifying of all is the expectation that Saudi Arabia will do anything at all that is helpful. If you want to strengthen moderate Sunnis against extremists, you should run screaming from Saudi Arabia. After oil, extremist Sunni theology is Saudi Arabia's major export.
While it is said that ISIS wouldn't exist if not for the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, and there is some truth to that, ISIS also would not exist if Saudi Arabia hadn't spent the last hundred years spewing its extremist violent for of Islam.
Saudi Arabia would never ever delegitimize ISIS's narrative because its rulers believe in the same narrative.
One day when the oil runs out, our grandchildren will view our support of Saudi Arabia the way we view our history of slavery. A vile evil that we pretended was necessary for too long
16
ISIS is not immune economics. They live off plunder, which is all well and good when you conquer new territory, which they haven't in over a year. Now that the US and Russia have cut off the rolling pipeline of trucks taking stolen Iraqi and Syrian oil to Turkey, where the Turkish President Erdogan's son Bilal, is running the operation which is the main funding of ISIS they are losing that income from plunder.
ISIS is not immune to military reality. You cannot hold a static position against overwhelming force. The only reason they have not been bombed to oblivion is they are holding civilians hostage in the cities they control. As the Iraqi army and Shia militias are doing in Ramadi, with Mosul next, you encircle those cities and cut off their resupply, and wait. We won't be seeing parades of matching Toyota Hi Lux trucks coming to relieve the sieges. A couple of passes by A-10 Warthogs will make that parade look like Saddam's troops leaving Kuwait.
ISIS is not immune to military reality. You cannot hold a static position against overwhelming force. The only reason they have not been bombed to oblivion is they are holding civilians hostage in the cities they control. As the Iraqi army and Shia militias are doing in Ramadi, with Mosul next, you encircle those cities and cut off their resupply, and wait. We won't be seeing parades of matching Toyota Hi Lux trucks coming to relieve the sieges. A couple of passes by A-10 Warthogs will make that parade look like Saddam's troops leaving Kuwait.
7
The "you need" list is missing at least two. (1) You need Turkey to stop buying ISIS oil. (2) You need Saudi Arabia to stop financing ISIS.
Follow the money.
Follow the money.
31
What a strange column.
It starts with an intelligent description of Putin's foray in Syria. Then it spouts nonsense about how to defeat ISIS. Then it ends, in the final paragraph, with the admission that it is an impossible venture.
All in the same column. What, exactly is your position, Mr Friedman?
It starts with an intelligent description of Putin's foray in Syria. Then it spouts nonsense about how to defeat ISIS. Then it ends, in the final paragraph, with the admission that it is an impossible venture.
All in the same column. What, exactly is your position, Mr Friedman?
41
Contrary to Tom Friedman's accounting here, many people would say that Putin's "war" on ISIS has been very successful on a number of counts: (1) alerting NATO and the world to Turkey's complicity in ISIS oil smuggling, (2) goading the U.S. to help destroy ISIS's fleet of oil tankers, (3) alerting NATO and the world to the Saudi and Gulf States' complicity in funding ISIS, and (4) goading the U.S. into pressuring the Saudis to stop the flow of money.
What irks Friedman, it would seem, is that Russia has embarrassed the United States by revealing the complicity of U.S. allies in using ISIS, al-Qaeda, and other jihadist groups as proxy armies against Assad -- with predictable blowback.
What irks Friedman, it would seem, is that Russia has embarrassed the United States by revealing the complicity of U.S. allies in using ISIS, al-Qaeda, and other jihadist groups as proxy armies against Assad -- with predictable blowback.
91
Lots of moving parts and different agendas in your article. You may have the best solution but there will never be this much cooperation .
1
Is there a Russian Tom Friedman journalist who asks "Obama's Syrian Misadventure" in their newspaper, and demands that Obama must step down just like Obama says about President Bashar? What right do we have telling people of other lands that they should get rid of their leaders? Just who do we think we are? Many years after The Ugly American was written, we still keep doing the same things.Just leave them alone and they will figure it out. It took us more than 200-years to get where we are today.
45
Almost a century ago the western powers carved up the Middle East, creating nations out of whole cloth, and have sought to directly control or indirectly manipulate events in the region ever since. All for the sake of the oil, and after 1948, for the sake of Israel, a nation imposed on the region to allay the collective guilt on the historical treatment of Jews. Now, for any number of reasons, the control and manipulation is coming undone and a century of repressed natural development is seeking to right itself. It's not going to be neat and it's not going to be nice.
"...humiliated young Muslim males, who’ve never held power, a decent job or a girl’s hand." That is a metaphor for the entire Middle East.
"...humiliated young Muslim males, who’ve never held power, a decent job or a girl’s hand." That is a metaphor for the entire Middle East.
9
So the western powers seek to directly control or indirectly manipulate the Middle East since 1948 "for the sake of Israel"? Do you honestly believe this or are you simply over exaggerating?
4
CLEARLY, Riyadh has no desire to crush it's proxy army, ISIS. Just one of the legacies of the Neo-Con mindset has been to be complicit with the Saudi transmission of Wahhabi extremism in the region, including the somehow forgotten redacting of their involvement in the 9/11 Commission's Report.
6
Friedman has unerringly, but I think unintentionally, characterized the tone of "The Great Coalition Against the Islamic State." This Crusade is looking more like The Third Crusade of vainglorious Kings and ancient rivalries, than a civilized response to a modern scourge, which has presented itself in the thoroughly Medieval Form of a murderous theocracy.
All of the members have contributed to the dysfunction by having seized the opportunity to ensure that their own particular interests supercede the good of the whole.
The Turks bomb the Peshmerga every chance they get rather than ISIS, and the Turkish Army which has the infantry forces which could by the use of combined arms destroy the weak conventional army of the Islamic State, but they instead kill the very Kurds who the US is attempting to deploy against IS.
The Sunni Royals created ISIS and are using ISIS to carve out a Sunni State in Assad's Syria and Shia Iraq, and I assume once they are rid of Assad, they might be willing to cooperate to rid us all of IS. The US seems to want ISIS contained, but not defeated out of deference to our Wahhabi allies...but why are we allied with the Wahhabi State anyway? I know Oil and Petrodollars are the stuff of American Empire.
Russia wants the secular Assad in place, because no doubt when the US declares victory and leaves, ISIS will rush into the vacuum to make Syria another Libya. Amusingly, Friedman has chosen to mock Putin who at least knows there are no moderate jihadis.
All of the members have contributed to the dysfunction by having seized the opportunity to ensure that their own particular interests supercede the good of the whole.
The Turks bomb the Peshmerga every chance they get rather than ISIS, and the Turkish Army which has the infantry forces which could by the use of combined arms destroy the weak conventional army of the Islamic State, but they instead kill the very Kurds who the US is attempting to deploy against IS.
The Sunni Royals created ISIS and are using ISIS to carve out a Sunni State in Assad's Syria and Shia Iraq, and I assume once they are rid of Assad, they might be willing to cooperate to rid us all of IS. The US seems to want ISIS contained, but not defeated out of deference to our Wahhabi allies...but why are we allied with the Wahhabi State anyway? I know Oil and Petrodollars are the stuff of American Empire.
Russia wants the secular Assad in place, because no doubt when the US declares victory and leaves, ISIS will rush into the vacuum to make Syria another Libya. Amusingly, Friedman has chosen to mock Putin who at least knows there are no moderate jihadis.
5
There haven’t yet been too many dead Russians, although that downed commercial jet in Egypt may be related and did bump the numbers some; but there have been a lot more anti-Assad Syrian tribesmen killed than Russians. If those tribes want to play a game of attrition, they’re probably not well positioned to be successful, particularly at the current exchange rate.
The degree of Putin’s success at relieving pressure on Assad depends on Putin’s strategic aims. If he has none but killing Islamist jihadists in Syria rather than needing to do it in Russia, then maybe he HAS had success. And if he figures he may as well target other tribes and not ISIS because the West is going to pay him THAT favor eventually, then he gets a kudo for smarts, doesn’t he?
Turkey and Russia are ancient adversaries, and from time to time that reality must find expression. If all it turns out to be is a Russian bomber, then it could be a lot worse. But what it tells us is that rumors probably are true that Turkey has had nuclear weapons for years, from its NATO involvements. If they hadn’t, then as the concern over Iran among Sunnis intensifies, Turkey would probably ask the Russkies to supply them if they needed to, as the Egyptians likely will. That doesn’t seem to be an option for now.
Calling Obama’s leadership in Syria an impossible job done badly is fair. But we seem to be flogging a blameless presidency: when did we STOP expecting our presidents to do the impossible, and to do it well?
The degree of Putin’s success at relieving pressure on Assad depends on Putin’s strategic aims. If he has none but killing Islamist jihadists in Syria rather than needing to do it in Russia, then maybe he HAS had success. And if he figures he may as well target other tribes and not ISIS because the West is going to pay him THAT favor eventually, then he gets a kudo for smarts, doesn’t he?
Turkey and Russia are ancient adversaries, and from time to time that reality must find expression. If all it turns out to be is a Russian bomber, then it could be a lot worse. But what it tells us is that rumors probably are true that Turkey has had nuclear weapons for years, from its NATO involvements. If they hadn’t, then as the concern over Iran among Sunnis intensifies, Turkey would probably ask the Russkies to supply them if they needed to, as the Egyptians likely will. That doesn’t seem to be an option for now.
Calling Obama’s leadership in Syria an impossible job done badly is fair. But we seem to be flogging a blameless presidency: when did we STOP expecting our presidents to do the impossible, and to do it well?
5
Friedman, you're a putz.
"You need Arab and Turkish troops to defeat ISIS"-who do you think is propping ISIS up, the Eskimos? What next-"without a coalition with the Sinaloa Cartel, we can't possibly stop the flow of drugs into the United States"? (Actually, I think that happened a couple of years ago-never mind.)
To presume to lecture Putin on how to manage Russian policy in the Middle East after the last several years of American disaster is just amazing chutzpah.
"You need Arab and Turkish troops to defeat ISIS"-who do you think is propping ISIS up, the Eskimos? What next-"without a coalition with the Sinaloa Cartel, we can't possibly stop the flow of drugs into the United States"? (Actually, I think that happened a couple of years ago-never mind.)
To presume to lecture Putin on how to manage Russian policy in the Middle East after the last several years of American disaster is just amazing chutzpah.
16
Russia's direct involvement in Syria is less than 3 months old. Those various anti-ISIS Sunni troops were nowhere to be seen prior to Russia's involvement, and won't be see after. They are supporting ISIS while giving us lip service. Without Putin protecting Damascus area, the millions left there would be slaughtered.
4
Today's NYT contains on article on the waning star of ISIS, perhaps strengthening the view of those, mostly historians (some who have published op-eds in the NYT), who claimed that ISIS as a political phenomenon will burn itself out.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/02/world/middleeast/isis-promise-of-state...®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news
As for some of the other points: "You need Arab, Kurdish and Turkish ground troops". The only Turkish ground troops that will ever participate are those who will fight the Kurds, i.e. their supposed allies against ISIS. Turkey is a major problem, probably more of a problem than the Russians. The Turks see the lynchpin of the fight against ISIS, the Kurds, as their enemy. Protecting the Turkman tribes is more important to them than fighting ISIS and their shooting down of the Russian plane was sheer stupidity and arrogance.
"Obama really does want to defeat ISIS". Unfortunately Mr. Friedman's prescription, his "mutually reinforcing coalition" is about as realistic as the "immaculate intervention", which he correctly rejects and derides.
"Those who dare to fail miserably can achieve greatly" (JFK). Mr. Obama does not dare to dare. Alas, Mr. Putin did and failed, so far. Time and history will judge who succeeded and who failed and who was afraid to dare.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/02/world/middleeast/isis-promise-of-state...®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news
As for some of the other points: "You need Arab, Kurdish and Turkish ground troops". The only Turkish ground troops that will ever participate are those who will fight the Kurds, i.e. their supposed allies against ISIS. Turkey is a major problem, probably more of a problem than the Russians. The Turks see the lynchpin of the fight against ISIS, the Kurds, as their enemy. Protecting the Turkman tribes is more important to them than fighting ISIS and their shooting down of the Russian plane was sheer stupidity and arrogance.
"Obama really does want to defeat ISIS". Unfortunately Mr. Friedman's prescription, his "mutually reinforcing coalition" is about as realistic as the "immaculate intervention", which he correctly rejects and derides.
"Those who dare to fail miserably can achieve greatly" (JFK). Mr. Obama does not dare to dare. Alas, Mr. Putin did and failed, so far. Time and history will judge who succeeded and who failed and who was afraid to dare.
5
The GOP impulse to dive right into the middle has not been diminished a bit by the tragic consequences of the Bush invasion of Iraq.
Yesterday on the PBS Newshour, Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, Chair of the US House Committee on Armed Services advocated a US force of thousands to defeat ISIS. When questioned about the political end game, who will in charge next and of what, the subtlety of the question apparently went over his head because he prattled on about US leadership.
In other words, the GOP seems to be following the Cheney Doctrine of "permanent occupation", but only as an unspoken, " we'll figure that out later", problem.
I know, we can send Paul Bremer back as Provisional Governor for Life of the Disputed Territories with a permanent annual budget of $100 billion or so. Don't worry, we'll get paid back in oil!
Yesterday on the PBS Newshour, Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, Chair of the US House Committee on Armed Services advocated a US force of thousands to defeat ISIS. When questioned about the political end game, who will in charge next and of what, the subtlety of the question apparently went over his head because he prattled on about US leadership.
In other words, the GOP seems to be following the Cheney Doctrine of "permanent occupation", but only as an unspoken, " we'll figure that out later", problem.
I know, we can send Paul Bremer back as Provisional Governor for Life of the Disputed Territories with a permanent annual budget of $100 billion or so. Don't worry, we'll get paid back in oil!
106
I saw that interview and am still steaming mad about it. The point at which I had to turn the channel came when Thornberry trotted out the well worn lie of Obama "abandoning Iraq" in 2011. Judy Woodruff didn't challenge him on it and my blood pressure went through the roof. She should have also challenged complaints about American (Obama's) leadership when he attempted to go to Congress in 2013 for an authorization to openly operate in Syria. Remember the GOP reaction then?
I'm sick of the GOP rubes and their attempts to rewrite history. The "W" administration negotiated the exit from Iraq after the Iraqis refused to accept a Status of Forces Agreement. Obama attempted to renegotiate the exit agreement, the Iraqis again refused, Obama honored the "W" agreement and we left.
A very big part of me says screw the Iraqis, they wanted us out, have a good life. Unfortunately, given Daesh's mission statement, and the Iraqi army's inability to hold onto a weapon, I know that part of me translated into action is unrealistic.
P.S. Note to our journalists...Get your collective crap together, call these people out when they lie and give us journalism!
I'm sick of the GOP rubes and their attempts to rewrite history. The "W" administration negotiated the exit from Iraq after the Iraqis refused to accept a Status of Forces Agreement. Obama attempted to renegotiate the exit agreement, the Iraqis again refused, Obama honored the "W" agreement and we left.
A very big part of me says screw the Iraqis, they wanted us out, have a good life. Unfortunately, given Daesh's mission statement, and the Iraqi army's inability to hold onto a weapon, I know that part of me translated into action is unrealistic.
P.S. Note to our journalists...Get your collective crap together, call these people out when they lie and give us journalism!
10
In other words, the GOP seems to be following the Cheney Doctrine of "permanent occupation", but only as an unspoken, " we'll figure that out later", problem.
===================
Sounds more like the Truman Doctrine - after all we still have troops in Germany, Italy and Japan 70 years later. And they are all peaceful democracies.
===================
Sounds more like the Truman Doctrine - after all we still have troops in Germany, Italy and Japan 70 years later. And they are all peaceful democracies.
Friedman here blames Russian policy for the terrorist attack on their plane. He never attributes terrorist attacks on the US to its policies.
He says this has cost Russia good relations with Turkey. It could equally be said that Turkish support of terrorists in Syria has cost Turkey good relations with Russia. Russia is after all attacking terrorists, and Turkey is supporting them and attacking Russia's ally.
He says that Russia is just dropping bombs. He does not say that about anybody else just dropping bombs. For others that is his preferred strategy.
He says that bombing must be supported by local ground forces. Putin is supporting local ground forces, Assad's, Hezbollah's, and Iran's. The US is the one having trouble creating effective ground forces.
He says that Putin does not help with the US efforts to set up ground forces to cooperate with the US. The US failed at that for years before Putin. The US insists on doing that in ways that must destroy the only existing ground forces, that are now cooperating with Russia. So the US is disrupting the only existing effective ground forces, in favor of a long-failed effort to create something that now looks like fantasy.
He says that this has cost Russia good relations with Iran, "newly at odds with Turkey and Iran." That line must be left over from an edit. It just isn't true.
He says Putin is weakened in Ukraine, because of threatened Turkman violence. That is the least of his problems in Ukraine.
This is nonsense.
He says this has cost Russia good relations with Turkey. It could equally be said that Turkish support of terrorists in Syria has cost Turkey good relations with Russia. Russia is after all attacking terrorists, and Turkey is supporting them and attacking Russia's ally.
He says that Russia is just dropping bombs. He does not say that about anybody else just dropping bombs. For others that is his preferred strategy.
He says that bombing must be supported by local ground forces. Putin is supporting local ground forces, Assad's, Hezbollah's, and Iran's. The US is the one having trouble creating effective ground forces.
He says that Putin does not help with the US efforts to set up ground forces to cooperate with the US. The US failed at that for years before Putin. The US insists on doing that in ways that must destroy the only existing ground forces, that are now cooperating with Russia. So the US is disrupting the only existing effective ground forces, in favor of a long-failed effort to create something that now looks like fantasy.
He says that this has cost Russia good relations with Iran, "newly at odds with Turkey and Iran." That line must be left over from an edit. It just isn't true.
He says Putin is weakened in Ukraine, because of threatened Turkman violence. That is the least of his problems in Ukraine.
This is nonsense.
199
Thanks, that is what I wanted to say but failed miserably.
3
"Friedman here blames Russian policy for the terrorist attack on their plane. He never attributes terrorist attacks on the US to its policies."
Bravo!
Bravo!
7
Spot on commentary.
2
ISIS is the result of instability, and designed by marauders, that want to foster this instability. Erratic military actions by the west make them stronger.
Neither Putin, nor Obama, or anyone else, knows how to gain a stable society, at least not without a very massive and enduring ground force. Obama after all prices in this insight, that there is no simple solution. We shouldn't meddle, unless we really mean it.
Neither Putin, nor Obama, or anyone else, knows how to gain a stable society, at least not without a very massive and enduring ground force. Obama after all prices in this insight, that there is no simple solution. We shouldn't meddle, unless we really mean it.
31
While Obama's ambivalence on Syria has at least spared the US of undue loss of lives and resources that could have been claimed by its deeper involvement in Syria no such advantage could Putin perhaps claim for Russia from his ill conceived military campaign in Syria which is sure to prove catastrophic for Russia, almost on lines of the Soviet debacle in Afghanistan in the eighties and its aftermath.
31
Dear Prof:
While it is possible to unscramble very long sentences devoid of punctuation it would be a great help to readers if there were some sort of guideposts within your missives that would lead to the eventual goal of deciphering your meaning if said guideposts were used with some frequency and then it might be a positive use of bandwidth in the illustrious archives of The New York Times where your messages are so often encountered.
While it is possible to unscramble very long sentences devoid of punctuation it would be a great help to readers if there were some sort of guideposts within your missives that would lead to the eventual goal of deciphering your meaning if said guideposts were used with some frequency and then it might be a positive use of bandwidth in the illustrious archives of The New York Times where your messages are so often encountered.
2
jimvj, and does your request apply to Larry Eisenberg's limericks as well, saying the same thing the columnist is saying but in rhymes?
2
So massive a mishmash we made
When told that we had to invade,
If we could reset
All factors you bet
That tyrant Hussein would have stayed..
Every move we make it all grows worse
A massive demand on our purse,
Chaos theory's in action
No simple redaction
Can undo the Neocon Curse.
Improvising is now in the wind
As this mess we all try to rescind,
No deus ex machina
Is in the arena,
For a long haul, together we're pinned.
When told that we had to invade,
If we could reset
All factors you bet
That tyrant Hussein would have stayed..
Every move we make it all grows worse
A massive demand on our purse,
Chaos theory's in action
No simple redaction
Can undo the Neocon Curse.
Improvising is now in the wind
As this mess we all try to rescind,
No deus ex machina
Is in the arena,
For a long haul, together we're pinned.
159
You are brilliant, thanks.
2
Go Larry!!
2
You say that Putin is now "newly at odds with Turkey and Iran."
Did you mean Saudi Arabia?
I believe that Russia and Iran are both allies of Assad, right?
a