(art by Pawel Kuczynski)
A 10 question (10 min.) informative survey is at the end of this post. please feel free to leave your thoughts – Thanks.
As an average concerned American I ponder on how we can defeat radical groups like ISIS. I want to know why after fighting for years, spending billions of tax dollars and losing too many good Americans these “tennis-shoe” clad bastards still control so much territory, impart fear across our globe and continue to ‘lop off heads,” like its a national sport?
My enquiring mind wanted answers the “regurgitated-news boobs” don’t know how or aren’t willing to produce, so I decided to read, watch enlightening programs, ponder my navel, and read some more. I’m not a professional politician nor military strategist but at this point, I’m not sure the so-called pros are either. I do have some experience to draw-on, as I served in a counter-insurgency team in Vietnam and have extensive personal travels, lugging this old bod from “the Stan” to “da Nam” trudging most countries in-between, Then on into East Africa with a highly respected NGO, thus terms like “insurgency,” “Muslim religion,” and “conflict zones” are not new to my gray-matter. Armed with those experiences, and good sources (books, documentaries, and conversations with “think-tank types” and former “boots on the ground” vets) I’ve come to believe there are 3 plausible solutions.
This “3-solutions”.., solution, formed in my mind when I saw a short interview with a guy named Peter Turchin who wrote “War and Peace and War: The Rise and Fall of Empires” using the Cliodynamics (History as Science) theory. His theory took a mathematical approach to accurately predict probable US “future theaters of conflict” before they happened (the Stan and Iraq.) Thus this overview to stopping ISIS is a combination of his talk and my experience. This paper is a stew (not to be confused with the one we’re currently in) composed of gleaning and thoughts from many sources and summed up nicely by Turchin.
I see extremely radical jihadist movement’s like a uncontrolled fire, which needs three elements to exist. Heat, Fuel and Oxygen or for our purpose: A radical movement of any kind (HEAT), a US intervention (FUEL) and the Media (OXYGEN.) If we remove one of these components, the fire goes out. Remove all and you have no potential for future fires. We (US and our allies) seem to have been focused on removing the “HEAT or Radical Movement” component of this triangle. To date it has cost us billions and far too many lives for the outcome we’ve achieved. Our political and military “professionals” have used what I’d call a “Wet Blanket” approach. We’ve been trying to throw a “wet blanket” on a moving heat source, which consistently melts into the local population, becoming very hard to find let alone isolate and remove.
Worse is, we’ve actually added FUEL to this fire by our very presence, meddling and intervening in the first place. Of course we’ve the words of Eisenhower echoing in our ears to “beware of the military industrial complex’s take over of our political system via those “Special Interest Groups.” Every jet fighter, bomber, and drone hitting a home, or any other overt destructive action perpetrated by us, just fuels their propaganda, reinforcing their belief that “the GREAT SATIN” (us) is out to destroy Islam )in this case) and their way of life. (see “Because They Hate” by Gabrier.) We are actually adding fuel to the afore mentioned “moving-heat-source,” that our wet-blanket policy cannot keep up with and suffocate (remember the game “whack-a-mole? well this is same-same.)
The third component is OXYGEN flowing freely into and out of the flames keeping them roaring and all consuming. By oxygen I mean the Media in all its tenderable global forms: Internet, TV news agencies, printed press coverage etc., which just spread this fire far and wide. Any fireman knows to cut oxygen off fast or it will just create more heat perpetuating an expanding burn. You cannot feed their cause by marketing and advertising and sometimes worse by “vilifying” them globally without triggering all the lone-wolf nuts to crawl out and use this unrelated “movement” to condone their own personal wacked out agendas. Cut off their connection to the outside world, by stopping the Oxygen (Media) flow. As any first year student of military history knows (and too many military and political leaders have forgot) you MUST “Know Your Enemy!” Know what they need to survive, to grow and to operate, it is necessary to have compiled this intel BEFORE we “leap in,” “yeeeehaaaaing” and “cowboy-ing up!” (see “Art of War” by Sun Tzu and “the Sling and The Stone” by Hammes.)
Sooooo what’s the bottom line for replacing the gazzzillon dollar fire-hose we’re now using? How do we hunt down a tennis-shoe army and not put our troops in unnecessary “harms-way?” (like we did in Nam.., hmm I keep seeing that old adage: “those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” See “Learning to Eat Soup with a Knife” by Nagl.) How do we WIN? Lets look at the 3 most possible approach’s (or at least the 3 that seem to be available to us by my way of thinking,) hopefully finding one that brings resolution while minimizing the cost in lives, time and money to eradicate these vermin. Our options are:
1 “Keep doing the Same ole Same ole” – This entails the USA (and allies) continuing to use air power to support local gov/indiginous friendly units. So far that strategy has yielded minimal returns for the money and lives spent in my view. It was these types of responses (high-Tec,) and Western presence (Meddling Intervention,) that actually fueled the growth of groups like al-Qaeda and ISIS to begin with. There were NO “Weapons of Mass Destruction” in Iraq (see “FIASCO” by Ricks) but our plowing into the region, playing “where’s Waldo” propelled those radical groups to move-in and increase their membership exponentially (the more we incurred, the more they grew and the more they committed worsening atrocities.)
Bin Laden got his start by using the Russian intervention (another western power in Jihadist eyes) into Afghanistan (Muslim country) to build his anti-West, hate and terror program (al-Qaeda) after leaving his military position within the Mujahedeen, under Pakistanis ISI organization. He left them because they were not fighting using a more terrorist and barbaric approach which he believed in. “Bin-ie baby” used a tried and true methodology to beat the Russians (tech-warriors), the same as the HO-baby’s, Viet Minh used on us, a “war of attrition” in “da-Nam.” (see “The Secret War” by Generous) Next we see Al-Zarqawi join Bin Laden’s al-Qada and later peal-off to start ISIS, as he didn’t see HIS former boss (Bin Laden) as “vicious enough.” (see “ISIS” by Weiss & Hassan)
There is a direct mathematical correlation between US intervention and a rise in both numbers and atrocities performed by terrorists in the region. (see also Cleo-Dynamics as an analytical science.) You can cut off the head all day but like the Hydra, a new one will keep growing back. Meddling, followed by military intervention, especially highly technical interventions, using advanced air-assaults, are very obvious to and impact civilians immensely. This approach just breeds a growing resentment and expanding HEAT source (Jihadist), keeping that fire a blazing away!
2. “Raise the Ante” Option two is the escalation of our efforts, by becoming more ruthless, like the terrorists in a “tit for tat” format, (massive buildup w/boots on the ground performing “search and destroy,”) till we’ve rooted and dug out all the insurgents/terrorists. I believe this approach would not only deplete our budget faster than we can perceive but worse be putting our troops into a very untenable situation (remember Iraq has a population of 33.5 million, while Afghanistan has 30.5 million and Libya over 6 million inhabitants.) That’s a shit-load of people to be in the middle of, while attempting to provide self-security AND supposedly hunting down that elusive tennis-shoe, wet-blanket, dodging army. On top of that, if we “roll-in-big-time,” we’re going to really fuel the local (and worlds) perception of us as an invading, mercenary force (which is another issue that needs addressing, you CANNOT USE MERCS! I’ll provide stats on that in another post. Sorry Dickless Cheney, I and the compiled stats show its not a positive nor productive way to run a war, while its good for your pocketbook it’s not good for the cause.)
Sorry readers for digressing. If we (America and its western allies) go marching in-mass, we’ll be seen as a predominately Christian Army, or at least perceived as one by the indigenous population and that fact will be used as propaganda by the radicals with devastating effect. It would literally be rekindling the “Holy Wars” of old which is not a good promo or lead-in to the “Hearts-n-Minds” image necessary for occupying and milling around in the vast sea of locals (see “Destiny Disrupted” by Ansary.) Again this “incursion” or “invasion” as they will see it, will breed the influx of future followers, who will be rallying to defend against what they believe to be a treat against their religion and way of life. This approach is just too great in cost of lives and money and will put the civilian population at a much GREATER RISK than either scenario 1 or 3. Boots-on-ground, in the numbers needed to be effective, will yield high collateral damage, and be more FUEL, for the fire. (see “Tactics of the Crescent Moon: Militant Muslim Combat Methods” by Poole.)
3. “Do Nothing!” By doing nothing (well, almost nothing) we will initially remove the FUEL (our ass) off their soil and our bombs from blowing up in it. These fanatics WHOLE MESSAGE justifying their existence, they’re deranged methods and barbaric actions are based on our physical presence. As shown above (Cleo-Dynamics study) our interdiction and incursion into hot spots like Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya exponentially increase the level of perpetrated ISIS violence and their atrocities AND their number of recruits. (Review past examples of our meddling into other regions backfiring if you would like us to not “repeat history!” i.e. Guatemala, Nicaragua, El Salvador, and Chile. Bay of Pigs, the Shah’s Iran, S. Vietnam, Indonesia, Congo, Trujillo’s DR, and the hits just keep on coming, but you get the point.) Every time we bomb/shoot/shell or pee practically (according to their very effective propaganda program) we create collateral damage, they hold up for the world and use as proof the “meddling Invaders” are out to destroy their culture and religion.
They use an old PROVEN format to defeat us, our own impetus and desire to try and help the world “Be Like Us!” It’s somewhat like paying ransom for a prisoner, which by doing so, you actually create the very events you’re trying to minimize. Doing nothing at first will be bloody, BUT remember, it already IS BLOODY! Long-term this “action by inaction” will yield less bloodshed than scenarios 1 or 2. By our pulling out (removal of all physical assets of men and equipment) and leaving the area (like a good campsite,) “as we found it,” we will be removing the FUEL (us) from the area. In doing that we will then see support for ISIS and its cause (Don’t’ forget Mao’s lil “Red Book’s” parable about da fishes and the ocean!) bled off steam and glamour thus their numbers will fall off, reducing another component of fire, HEAT or the radical group. Just keep remembering the exponential documentation ratio of incursion to recruitment – (see Peter Turchin’s “Cliodynamics study.”)
Now that we’ve REMOVED the FUEL, and significantly REDUCED the HEAT, hamstringing their overall effectiveness, lets focus on removing their OXYGEN or ability to “reach out”, recruit and gain attention, empathy and support. Our NSA (among other agencies) should be able to completely isolate a regions ability to communicate electronically. I mean if we can sit at home and watch an erector-set on wheels roll around Mars sending back spectro-analized samples of its soil and atmosphere telling us water was there millions of years ago, I’m pretty sure they can “fry” some cell-towers chip’s from afar or better yet “jam” outgoing signals from zones known to harbor ISIS components. We could use the money reserves of NOT putting “boots on the ground” and an “expensive air bombing campaign” to create a well equipped, state of the art electronics and encryption program to both block their transmissions/texts/social media recruitment efforts AND to triangulate (to use an old term) the source of their transmissions. Just like the Green Bennies slowly “herded” Che Chevara into a Bolivian jungle corner to deliver the coup de grace. By isolating their organization from the populace we can herd them into a dead-zone of ineffectiveness, they would wither on the vine.
We need to let the local-peoples deal with their own issues internally till they cease to rally around such a cause. Just like the divorced husband says, “you can’t blame me anymore dear, I moved out a long time ago.” If we’re not there then we cant’ be blamed for meddling or invading, and its obvious to the local population we are not persecuting, bombing or disrupting any of them, we are in-fact leaving them to fend for themselves, make their own choices, and decide if they want to live under that tyranny or rebel (like we did in 1776). Joni Mitchell had it right when she sang “ You don’t know what had till it’s gone!” and that’s what they need, self-motivation. While it sounds cruel, I believe in the end it will produce faster, more positive results in pulling ISIS’s teeth and the minimization of both civilian and military casualties than the approaches we see at doors number 1 or 2 above.
This is just a “food for thought,” segment, hopefully stimulating other peons like myself, who have to do the actual fighting and paying for with tax dollars so some “special interest groups” profit margin rises to THINK.
WE, us minions, need to “think” and “express” our thoughts and expectations to our representatives who are currently either clueless (best case scenario) or more probably serving those “special interest groups” with little thought for us grunts, “the mere splinters on the head of a club they are holding over the world.”
All I’ve seen these last few years is we constantly pour our money and citizens into the “Industrial Military Complex’s” grinder hoping for different results to magically appear, and we all know “to keep repeating the same action over and over expecting different results is called “INSANITY!” (a very wise quote by our homeboy Albert!)
REMEMBER: Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1960, retirement speech p. 1035-1040:
“This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence — economic, political, even spiritual — is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society. n the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.”
Web survey powered by SurveyMonkey.com. Create your own online survey now with SurveyMonkey’s expert certified FREE templates.
Source: Solutions to stop ISIS Survey