• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

French getting another round of "inshallah"

Brett327 said:
My point isn't whether or not IS exercises control over a group of people, but that the geography is vast and lacks security or rule of law by any party. In that sense, it is ungoverned.
Click to expand...

Looks as much like a government as the one we support in Afghanistan. Stands to reason. ISIS may not govern their territory like a first word country, but they aren't a first world country. ISIS has only been in the governing business for several months. Ultimately they want a true calaphite. They want empire. It is clear they intend to govern under the law as they see it.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/18/world/meast/isis-syria-iraq-hierarchy/
http://time.com/3720063/isis-government-raqqa-mosul/
 
wink said:
Looks as much like a government as the one we support in Afghanistan. Stands to reason. ISIS may not govern their territory like a first word country, but they aren't a first world country. ISIS has only been in the governing business for several months. Ultimately they want a true calaphite. They want empire. It is clear they intend to govern under the law as they see it.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/18/world/meast/isis-syria-iraq-hierarchy/
http://time.com/3720063/isis-government-raqqa-mosul/
Click to expand...
I absolutely think that ISIS's COG is the territory they occupy. Not only because they need it for legitimacy, but also to smuggle its oil across borders as a major source of funding for its operations.

ISIS is very much a rudimentary state. They have a system of government, a body of laws, an economy, and an army. The phrase 'we always fight the last war' comes to mind here, and it seems like the underlying assumption is that any ground operation would result in a protracted insurgency like OIF.

But our political rhetoric makes it more complicated to send land forces in to uproot them. We don't acknowledge ISIS as a sovereign state, so even if they are responsible for attacking a country there is no legal basis to violate Syria or Iraq's borders to uproot them. Syria and Iraq aren't asking us to come in and help, so ignoring the UN treaty to send in land forces would set a bad precedent here, even if bigger 'frienemies' like Russia and China don't intervene on some level to keep us out, let alone actual adversaries like Iran. That's aside from the aforementioned challenge of getting commitment from neighboring countries to sustain order post-war.

So like an alcoholic at his first AA meeting, the first step is admitting that we have a problem and what that problem is - there is a small nation governed by Islamic militants that wishes to expand its territory to conquer the entire Middle East and kill anyone who isn't Sunni Muslim in the process. Once we* can get past the political rhetoric of not calling them a 'state' or 'Islamic terrorists,' we can recognize them for what they are and shape an effective strategy to defeat them.

*we refers to political leadership as I'm quite certain some very smart and talented GOs have already weighed several options from all sorts of different angles.
 
The more I think about this, the worse I feel, especially after listening the the President this afternoon. I'm not sure if the west can process the evil that we are going to face. I'm scared that we have lost faith in ourselves and the idea of liberal democracy because of our past sins, and will lay down, wallowing in a false moral equivalency. We have the power the eradicate this current evil, but it won't be without consequences that will be, well, uncomfortable. We faced a similar evil 70 years ago and we eradicated it with extreme prejudice. I don't think we have the stomach for that again..........I pray that I'm wrong...........I hope that I'm just an old cold warrior yelling "you kids get off of my lawn".
 
jmcquate said:
The more I think about this, the worse I feel, especially after listening the the President this afternoon. I'm not sure if the west can process the evil that we are going to face. I'm scared that we have lost faith in ourselves and the idea of liberal democracy because of our past sins, and will lay down, wallowing in a false moral equivalency. We have the power the eradicate this current evil, but it won't be without consequences that will be, well, uncomfortable. We faced a similar evil 70 years ago and we eradicated it with extreme prejudice. I don't think we have the stomach for that again..........I pray that I'm wrong...........I hope that I'm just an old cold warrior yelling "you kids get off of my lawn".
Click to expand...
We should be treating this "state" like we treated a couple of totalitarian states in the 40's. Launch B-52's, and make Raqqa flat. Repeat the process for every city ISIS controls. We leveled Germany's and Japan's cities and brought them to their knees. If ISIS wants to be a nation, they can be targeted like one.
 
hscs said:
Why do you say the COG for ISIL is territory?

Would they have that territory without an ideology?
Click to expand...
They could. Are you saying it was wrong for the U.S. to fight WWII the way it did because, at the end of the day, we were at war with fanatical leaders with ideologies that clashed with ours?
It's important to distinguish the organizations leadership and the people it recruits.

In order for ISIS to continue coordinating its attacks and maintaining its operations, it needs land. Their goal, stated by its leadership, is to conquer more land. Everything else ISIS does stems from the fact that they hold territory to stage and fund their operations, including the ideologically driven recruiting propaganda. That's what makes their territory the COG. Will taking that land away from them eradicate every fanatic Muslim in the world? No, but it will make them so small as to minimize the threat from them. Then again there are still people who call themselves Nazis, too.
 
Last edited:
Treetop Flyer said:
I know, and I agree. We had the will to face evil with the force required back then. Today we obviously do not.
Click to expand...
I wonder if the nation would have had such a resolve if they could get a modern close-up of the war. The country goes nuts when our soldiers pissed on a Koran, I'd hate to see what they would have done if they saw Japs being burned alive with flamethrowers on CNN evening news.
 
Spekkio said:
I wonder if the nation would have had such a resolve if they could get a modern close-up of the war. The country goes nuts when our soldiers pissed on a Koran, I'd hate to see what they would have done if they saw Japs being burned alive with flamethrowers on CNN evening news.
Click to expand...
I think they would. They were much more open about what we were doing back them. "Kill japs, kill japs, kill more japs." -Halsey

However the Japanese and Germans didn't advertise their atrocities like ISIS does. ISIS goes out of their way to show how bloodthirsty and sadistic they are. Japanese getting torched while fighting from a pillbox isn't quite as offensive as a captive pilot drenched in gasoline, set on fire, and broadcast to the world.
 
Treetop Flyer said:
I think they would. They were much more open about what we were doing back them. "Kill japs, kill japs, kill more japs." -Halsey

However the Japanese and Germans didn't advertise their atrocities like ISIS does. ISIS goes out of their way to show how bloodthirsty and sadistic they are. Japanese getting torched while fighting from a pillbox isn't quite as offensive as a captive pilot drenched in gasoline, set on fire, and broadcast to the world.
Click to expand...
True, yet somehow despite ISIS broadcasting these atrocities the narrative somehow turns into how Muslims are a misunderstood, oppressed people and the U.S. along with its alliance with Israel is at fault for all of the strife in the Middle East. Oh, and don't forget neckbeards like Michael Moore making bad documentaries about oil conspiracies.

This is another nuance that I think would be significantly reduced if our political leadership recognized ISIS as a nation intent on waging war on not just its neighbors, but western civilization and treated them as such.
 
wink said:
Looks as much like a government as the one we support in Afghanistan. Stands to reason. ISIS may not govern their territory like a first word country, but they aren't a first world country. ISIS has only been in the governing business for several months. Ultimately they want a true calaphite. They want empire. It is clear they intend to govern under the law as they see it.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/18/world/meast/isis-syria-iraq-hierarchy/
http://time.com/3720063/isis-government-raqqa-mosul/
Click to expand...

I think we're losing sight of my point on this issue. Regardless of how one defines a State, or how governed that State might be, the geography in the Levant into which IS could retreat, should they be defeated by direct military action in the urban centers, is massive. It would be very easy for them to revert to insurgent mode. That likelihood complicates many avenues of potential Western military escalation.
 
The other issue is that no one is going to fight. Look how ISIS rolled through Iraq. Sure we can bomb them and put ground forces in to take them out, but like Brett is saying, all they have to do is hide in the desert and wait out for us to leave. This ideology isn't one that will go away quickly. And when they come back, they'll probably roll through the country again with little resistance. It's as if some people just can't be helped. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. You can provide aid and weapons to our "allies" but it means nothing if they don't put in the effort.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top