(12-23-2015 08:59 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: Remember this.
The region controlled by ISIS is majority Sunni, and by a wide margin. The alternatives to ISIS--Syria, Iraq, and Iran--are all Shia. We don't have a Sunni alternative. Until we do, any victory is almost certain to turn Pyrrhic.
The basic strategy of the colonial powers in the middle east seemed to be (1) draw lines on a map and call it a country, (2) pick the largest minority group in the "country" and appoint the baddest SOB as the leader... he would need the support of the smaller minority groups, thereby guaranteeing their safety (if the majority group had power, it would lead to ethnic cleansing ... see the Armenian Genocide), (3) popcorn. Hence, the Sunnis led Iraq, the Shia led Syria.
Something to understand about the ISIS problem. The Assad regime intentionally concentrated on moderate groups in order to make the west fear ISIS and realize that Assad is not as bad as Sunni Islamists. They released radicals from prison in order to polarize the opposition. I've posted about this strategy before Russia got involved in the region, and their first actions were to attack the Free Syrian Army and other (relative) moderates supported by the US, Syria, Saudi, and Qatar.
It's been said here before (I'm sure by Owl 69/70/75 among others)... when your enemies are fighting to the death, the best strategy is to get out of the way.
My thought is to stay out of the way until and unless ISIS gives a reason to get involved. If there's a lone wolf attack in the US, send a sustained bombing campaign against Raqaa 24x7 for a week or so. If there's a Paris-style attack, make clear that it's the end of Raqaa.
If it becomes necessary to get involved, then start by razing Raqaa to the ground, turn troops south to Damascas and lay siege until Assad is gone from the country, then turn to Mosul and make clear that you'll do to Mosul what you did to Raqaa unless they kill the jihadis themselves and send their heads to you.
At that point, draw three lines on the map, tell Kurds and other minorities to go north of the lines, Shia to go south, and Sunni to stick between the lines... and tell the Turks to stuff it or face losing their own territory to Kurdistan. Iraq and Syria no longer exist in the same form that they did 20 years ago, and if the US does go into the region on the ground, then it's time to stop pretending that they do. There's Kurdistan, Shiastan, and Sunnistan, and a whole lot of ethnic cleansing required to make them stable (see India-Pakistan).
I don't think we gain anything by increased vetting of refugees coming from Syria or monitoring Mosques, or self-reporting. I think we need to make clear that Jihadis cannot win by attacking the US... they will not create a new state by engaging in a reign of terror like ISIS has and widening that to attack the West. Make it clear that they cannot win, and they will not be able to recruit. Screw the idea that we've hit too many wedding parties and that's what wins recruits to the jihadis, and adopt the idea that we will destroy everything they've built if they attack.
The Obama administration has adopted a concept called offshoring in their fight against ISIS. There is some wisdom in it to the extent that its premise is that Occupation breeds terrorism and suicide bombings. I think the doctrine of offshoring mistakenly disregards the significance of ideology in the process. Bombings like the Paris bombing are partly a consequence of French involvement in Syria, but served a strategic purpose in telling the French to back out. The French response was to show bravado, launch a campaign of bombing sand. That is a pretty clear signal to ISIS that they accomplished what they intended. Occupation in some form (of Kuwaiti and Saudi bases, at the invitation of Kuwait and Saudi) is what brought al Qaeda and eventually ISIS to the fore, but it's ideology that has and will sustain it. The Obama administration wishes to tell the world what Islam means, who is a good Muslim and who is a fake Muslim, and what god tells the Muslims. They are completely oblivious to the ideology behind the actions of their enemies, and simply not good at understanding the strategy either of their enemy or coming up with a coherent, sensible strategy to achieve their aims.
Strikes on Raqqa in Syria Lead to More Questions Than Results - The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/18/world/...ref=topics Wrote:Several people in Lebanon, Syria and Turkey who have been able to make contact with relatives in Raqqa say the recent French airstrikes — a barrage of about 30 on Sunday night and seven more on Monday — did not kill any civilians. But neither did they inflict serious military damage, those people said, instead hitting empty areas or buildings, or parts of the territory of factory complexes or military bases used by the Islamic State.
