THE CONVERSATION AFTER PARIS: WHAT SHOULD THE UNITED STATES DO???

Share Button

I was having an interesting conversation on Ruben Navarette’s facebook page, started when one commenter said the following:

“It is unconscionable for us to have the power to take down ISIS but to do as little as possible instead.”

After rebuffing that notion, someone asked me this:

“What do you suggest we do? Sitting back and doing nothing while ISIS gets stronger is an invitation for more of last night and then some.”

Here is the long and the short of it. Even though we and other western countries have been hit a few times, ultimately, this is not our fight. The only way this is permanently settled is going to be by the countries and populations in the middle east. This is a civil war. It can no more be won by us than our own civil war could have been one if Briton fought for the north instead of the Union soldiers themselves. They have to fight, and die, and provide no place for these bastards to run to and hide. Through all our military action in the last 14 years, from tech and ground support, to training police, to actual boots on the ground, all we do is see them go to safe havens in Pakistan, Lybia, Syria, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Egypt… You name it. We CAN’T defeat them because they have too many safe havens to go to and reconstitute. Remember, the underwear bomber tried his attack when we still “had Al Qaeda on the run”.

The emergence of ISIS has changed some of the dynamics. Turkey and the Kurds are now cooperating, if reluctantly, and are making a real dent in the ISIS forces. Iran is fighting against ISIS. OK…. I’m not a big Iran fan, but sometimes you take help where you can get it. We did so in WW2 when we allied with Stalin, and this probably doesn’t get resolved without Iran at the table. But they have to do it. Thing is, as long as we keep going in trying to fix things – and failing – the other countries don’t feel the need to get more involved… Saudi Arabia, I’m looking your way. That pattern HAS to end.

We can play a limited role in this fight. I’m not saying we just go home and twiddle our thumbs. This is a civil war. The middle east has to fight it and w.

30.

+6+

Sorry… my dog decided she was better at typing than I am.

As i was saying…. This is a civil war. The middle east has to fight it and win it in order for there to be any resolution to it.

The other option is to fight it ourselves. But we have already seen that 129,000 troops and ten plus years is not enough. To really win…. And I mean WIN!… We would have to have about 20 to 30 or more troops to march through every country in the world and slaughter anyone that even remotely seems like a terrorist. That would require reimplementing the draft of course. And 50 to 100 years is not too far of as far as a time estimate to fight this to win.

And then there’s the cost.

 

Oh… And one more thing.

We have to decide what is more important in Syria… Getting rid of ISIS? Or getting rid of Assad. We’re not going to get both.

That’s how ef’d up the situation is. Both choices suck. But there it is. That’s the reality of the situation staring us in the face.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply