Airstrikes in Syria-Pounding ISIS/ISIL

Deflating the momentum that the Islamic State had gained in August and September 2014 has been a strategic security imperative, one that demanded immediate action as the world witnessed the increasing boldness of those under the black flag.  And now was time to pound the territory the Islamic State refers to as  their “conquered land”.  The reasons for the delay in a U.S. response are complicated but are not limited to duplicitousness of the Syrian regime, issues with Russia,  the concurrence of Saudi Arabia, complications with Iran, concern for Jordan's security,, and the indecisiveness of Turkey.  Still, it was TIME to provide a very clear message to those groups that were moving forward with a full head of steam, the world does not support your goals. The free rein that those under the leadership of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi (his name is no coincidence) have operated under in recent months had reached levels sufficient to convince selective Arab nations to partner with the United States in the assault against the ever-widening destabilization in the Middle East. Additionally, Al-Baghdadi’s rhetoric against the U.S. in recent videos demonstrated his grandiose estimation of his ability to counter the power of the United States. Baghdadi’s taunts were all a piece of his strategy.  Challenging and drawing the power of the U.S. to his “battlefield” props up his image in the eyes of his followers.  Drawing the military ire of the U.S. allows him to position himself as a prestigious successor to all who have sought to attack the power and culture of the West. It also puts the spotlight on his movement, thus dimming the glare for the lore of Al Qaeda, bin Ladin, and supports his goal to ultimately place all other radicalized Islamic groups under his flag.  His braggadocios taunts were intentional, aligned with his estimation of himself as a figure to lead an army of fighters who are destined to purge all who do not convert to his brand.  Al-Baghdadi holds himself as a caliph, a leader of an empire,  most importantly, the sole leader of all Muslims around the world. The thrust of the first assault against ISIS strongholds under cover of the night sky on September 22/23 conveyed the only message both the Islamic State and the Khorasan Group would receive.

These groups, in particular, adhere to an ideology that is so depraved, only overwhelming lethal force will blunt their operations.   Pounding the targets within the Syrian borders is only the first step in sending a message to both terrorist groups. The effects of Tomahawk precision strikes against command and control nodes has apparently proven effective in the degradation of several key sites; giving pause to the momentum of these terrorist groups. But the public must be clear about kinetic consequences.  While the U.S. led coalition is armed with overwhelming conventional power, the Islamic State along with the Khorasan Group is equipped with unconventional power.  And it is certain that al-Baghdadi will retaliate. Under what time frame his attention will pivot from claiming territory for his version of an Islamic Caliphate is uncertain.  But he will pivot. As will the leadership of the Khorasan Group.  Plots will be advanced for unconventional attacks.   The nexus of a radiating threat posed by these groups against the U.S. with the airstrikes is undeniable; those who hold western passports are able to easily move between countries without notable detection.  This shadowy threat is one that will require that attentiveness of the general public in terms of reporting unusual behaviors to the appropriate authorities.  It will require a concerted effort as the U.S. and the West contend with this present threat. For those voices who assert that the United States should not be involved in yet another conflict in the Middle East, their position is faulty, short-shorted, and wishful.  The world cannot say when on the timeline an attack will be directed at the U.S. or the EU or perhaps Australia or Canada.  But given the information already available, given the public statements Baghdadi has released to the global community, and when evaluating the actions taken by the Islamic State heretofore, a terrorist threat is a clear and present danger. Events on the ground, operations not revealed to the public, and the increasing brutality against women and children should be viewed more like a fire that is blazing out of control.  Left to burn uncontrolled, the trajectory is clear to see. And unfortunately, there will be more recruits like moths to the flame.  The  ferocity and energy that accompanies U.S. involvement in the Middle East will become a clarion call to those who are drawn to this form of radicalized Islamist ideology.   It must be repeated again and again, Baghdadi does not represent Islam.  (And we need to recognize that Baghdadi is more of a psychopath than any thing else.)  He will “green-light” nascent copy-cats who want to launch attacks against western nations or peoples. He will make operational any viable attempts to attack because he must demonstrate his “battle-legs” in the face of U.S. military superiority. Baghdadi must obviate the attention from the devastation wrought by the powerful airstrikes and exploit it for his own public profile.  In his estimation, the response of the U.S. underscores his religious role as quasi-savior of the Islamic world. The airstrikes will not eradicate this threat, but they serve to convey to the leadership of ISIS/ISIL what it means to be in the crosshairs of the U.S. military. There is much work to be done.  This will be a multi-dimensional fight.  The diplomatic efforts must work in conjunction with the all too important battlefront in the financing of terrorism. Muslim's themselves must stand up to the perversion of their religion by discrediting these terrorist groups. Middle East actors must compel those in power to retard the spread of the black flag. The scourge of terrorism is a pernicious threat and striking a blow at the marrow of this ideology will be a long-term process involving the establishment of more legitimate forms of democratic governments in the Greater Middle East.  The public must come to terms with the reality that  there is no drive-through approach to fighting this type of enemy.  It will require a multi-prong effort to suppress, and eventually extinguish the threat from radicalized terrorist groups.  And the will of the voting public in democratic states must develop sufficient political muscle to support those politicians who demonstrate the  leadership to get out in front of terrorist threats. President Obama is scheduled to speak to the United Nations General Assembly and the timing of the military operations may provide a political platform for the president to leverage the fragile coalition of nations in to a more comprehensive approach. The strikes will also bolster his position at a time when U.S. leadership has been sorely needed. Fighting this nihilistic threat will require not just a coalition of a few partners, but begs for the cooperation of the world. Leaders in the Arab states who cry fowl at U.S. military engagement in a Middle East nation are playing to their domestic audience.  A disingenuous position because the threat posed by the Islamic State includes every existing government in the region as illegitimate; thereby falling in to the category of the "near enemy".  Arab leaders must reckon with the internal political pressures to arrive at a more realistic presentation of the distinction between moderate Islam and radicalized Islam.  Radicalized Islam presents a threat to the Arab population as well.  As a perversion of Islam, SIS/ISIL is no friend to Muslims.  No Muslim condones wanton death and destruction.  No Muslim sanctions the assertion that a self-appointed leader who rapes women, children, and executes other Muslims is acting in the name of Islam.   The return of The Prophet  to Mecca following the triumph over those who threatened to annihilate the new community of Muslims in the years following 622CE represents the way of Islam.  The Prophet showed mercy to the Meccans and treated the women and children with kindness.  The Prophet was not a thug, a psychopath, nor presented himself as a savior.  The Prophet was confident, yes.  But humble.  Al-Bagdhadi and all those of his ilk are pretenders and must be dealt with as such.  Those readers of this blog in Muslim countries will recognize the truth in those words. 

Interrupting the logistics for the Islamic State and Khorasan Group planning was a crucial first step in what will decidedly be a long-term campaign.  Merely interrupting a highly adaptable threat such as ISIS/ISIL can not achieve the necessary results that the U.S. military will want to see accomplished.  President Obama has apparently given the military the latitude to fully execute their mission.  The mission in its initials phases is to severely blunt the force of the Islamic State threat and to mute the execution of a plan by  the Khorasan Group.   The President has made the right decision.  Mr. Obama is a reluctant and resistant war president.  Understandable.  But he has demonstrated a proclivity for decisiveness at such time he does ascertain that exercising his role as Commander-in-Chief includes military response. Furthermore, it does appear that Mr. Obama has also, reluctantly, recognized that his role as president of the most powerful nation warrants action on behalf of others who depend on the leadership of the U.S.  It is beyond doubt that the security of of the people of the United States is interlinked with the security of those in other regions of the world. The U.S. can get out in front of this reality or it can play catch up after a direct terrorist attack.  Getting out in front is a better strategy.

Today, my analysis leads me to say, Pound ISIS/ISIL  and pound them hard. And repeatedly. Require their leadership to be cautious and fearful.   Every civilian death is regretable.  All suffering from these airstrikes and further operations yet to be deployed is deeply regretable. But given the conditions on the ground, action must be taken.  Knowing there will be consequences and collateral damage,  my position remains, Pound them and pound them hard.