How to Defeat Isis

I am not a pacifist but I do abhor war. History teaches that we must defend ourselves from aggression and nations are entitled to do that and when they do that they must pursue their defence with all possible means that accord to the rules of war and are consistent with accepted civilised conduct. The activities of ISIS in Syria and Iraq are considered by many world leaders to be a threat to many nations and those leaders believe that threat extends to acts of terrorism carried out in places other than Syria and Iraq. 

If those leaders are right, then it seems to me that bombing in Iraq and Syria does not constitute an adequate defence of their nations. It has the further disadvantage of driving many of those bombed into the arms of ISIS, which strike me as being led by psychopaths. Bombing defends neither the people of Syria and Iraq to any significant degree, nor does it protect other nations from acts of terrorism.

The logical conclusion is that ISIS must be fought and defeated by all military and other means available, even if it does mean aligning temporarily with undesirable tyrants in order to do this. This would mean in effect, sending an army in to defeat ISIS, forming an alliance with president Assad of Syria, and defeating ISIS permanently, bringing their leaders to trial under international law.

There have been many historical precedents which show that democratic nations have aligned with autocratic dictators in order to defeat a common enemy, and many historical precedents which show the lack of effectiveness of bombing. You cannot fight a war with bombs alone.

It also strikes me that it should not be beyond the wit of the great democracies to cut off the supply of money and arms to ISIS. It seems that no effective attempt has been made to do this.


2 Responses

  1. It is true that it is time to support Assad, enough of these ‘moderate’ rebels.

  2. I think Assad has been unfairly demonised by the western media solely justify his removal. This suits the Sunni’s, the Turks, and mostly the Qatari gas export pipeline proposals.

    Erdogan gets NATO support yet he seems to me a far more unpleasant ruler. Also, what about Saudi Arabia’s ‘king’. He sponsors sunni terrorists, he orders beheading of so-called criminals.He orders the bombing of civilians in Yemen. Despite this he cozies up to our respectable? monarchy.

    Why doesn’t Saudi Arabia. Qatar,Jordan, UAE etc welcome Syrian refugees? Because they’re not Sunni.

    ISIS was first set up by emptying Saudi prisons and training the criminals in Jordan. Being a CIA protege, ISIS is the Hollywood version of a terrorist organisation. The motive for what they do is clearly not religion. It does not even have a proper figurehead like OBinL. ISIS is designed to spread fear like a horror movie, There is no obvious philosophical ethos for what they do other than fear mongering. e.g. First, expertly filmed gruesome videos of beheadings, next upscaled gruesome activities. (I am surprised that they haven’t yet been filmed eating babies). Then plunder resources and historic artefacts, next sell oil to corrupt politicians. In this movie the bad guys were set to win until Russia/Iran/Hizbollah stepped in.

    Prior to Russia/Iran/Hizbollah’s intervention each step they made was choreographed like a Hollywood movie by the real organisers behind the scenes.

    If you base your opinions on western media your just another victim of “the slime” (courtesy F. Zappa)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: