I’d like to commend a pair of articles on the “Islamic State”, DAESH to your attention. The first is an article in Atlantic by Graeme Wood on DAESH’s objectives:
Ideological tools may convince some potential converts that the group’s message is false, and military tools can limit its horrors. But for an organization as impervious to persuasion as the Islamic State, few measures short of these will matter, and the war may be a long one, even if it doesn’t last until the end of time.
It seems to me that one of the problems that Western secularists have in understanding DAESH is that they refuse to believe that it’s possible for people to be genuinely sincere about religious conviction. I think that points to a serious defect in Western secularists, a strategic weakness.
The present prevailing wisdom seems to be that DAESH will burn itself out because it can’t govern. Neither could the Ottoman, the last caliphate. That only troubled the West for the better part of a millennium. Only a few million people lost their lives in the wars that ensued from the 15th to the 19th centuries. With modern technology I’m sure DAESH can improve on that.
The other is from USA Today:
WASHINGTON – Since exploding onto the world stage as a conquering force in Iraq a year ago, the Islamic State has expanded its reach across the Middle East despite a U.S.-led bombing campaign that has killed thousands of militants and destroyed tons of their equipment.
Monday, Egypt launched an airstrike against Islamic State targets in neighboring Libya after the terrorist group posted a video of militants beheading a group of Egyptian Christians.
This month, U.S. forces killed a former Taliban leader in southern Afghanistan who had sworn allegiance to the Islamic State weeks earlier. The Pentagon said the group’s presence in Afghanistan was nascent but demonstrated its global aspirations.
Signs of the Islamic State have emerged throughout the Middle East. Some extremists in the Sinai, where militants battle the Egyptian government, have sworn allegiance to the Islamic State. Groups affiliated with the militant organization have popped up in Algeria and Tunisia.
The beheadings and burnings that have shocked the West and rallied some Middle Eastern governments to oppose the Islamic extremists have appealed to young Muslims willing to fight the West or what they perceive as corrupt Arab governments.
My view is that DAESH is likely to be a nuisance to the United States, dangerous to Europe, and an existential threat to a number of our notional allies in the Middle East and North Africa. I wouldn’t equate DAESH with Islam but I do think it represents a disease that is endemic in Islam.
Apocalyptic fundamentalism is a world-wide phenomenon. Almost every secular person in the world has encountered somebody with sincere beliefs based on the literal text of a religion. This has nothing to do with secularists and how they view religion.
ISIS is basically an Islamic version of the Aryan Nation operating in chaos and possessing military equipment. Saying that they’re going to be an existential threat is about right. They’re the waste product of rotten governments and the American invasion of Iraq and the strange honesty of Islam. The last I’m not totally certain about. I don’t know that much about the Koran, but from what I do know, empire and conquest are built into it, whereas with Christianity they came after the text.
The present prevailing wisdom seems to be that DAESH will burn itself out because it can’t govern. Neither could the Ottoman, the last caliphate.
But governing NOW is more necessary for sustaining the large populations the world now has, including the areas IS now governs.
Because we’ve only experienced a few American beheadings, all confined to overseas locations, and no defined attacks within our own borders, ISIS and all it’s acronym affiliates, may continue to be viewed as a gang-like nuisance. However, once there is a dramatic episode over here, possibly planned in a wave-like coordination, the way we look at ISIS will also dramatically evolve. Various military analysts are predicting such an event this year.
Additionally, if we continue the bombing missions long enough it’s inevitable that one or more aircraft will crash or be shot down and a pilot or other airman captured and burned alive. IMO that’s a foreseeable consequence of the present strategy. I hope its supporters are ready for the escalation.
Dave, if one of our military is captured, it will be met by ISIS et al as an exhilarating exercise of unimaginable torture, filmed and distributed to social media for posterity and purposes of recruitment propaganda. Like Tasty has written, Americans cozied-up in their comfortable living rooms, would freak out.
Pathologies “endemic” in Islam tend to grow from tiny cells to substantial movements as a direct result of the disease that is endemic in the United States, imperial hubris steered in large part by the Lobby.
All this pontificating when the Obama State Dept already has it nailed: jobs programs. You throw in midnight basketball and I’m sure we won’t see any more beheadings………
A good example of the point I made in the body of the post. The Administration doesn’t believe it’s possible that DAESH could be sincere.
I enjoy the advantage in a forum like this to waggishly make fun of things like that. But in my business life I contrast how we exhaustively consider alternatives in tough situations, how we employ the some of the finest third party counsel you can find, and then how we deliberate in fairly bare knuckled fashion all in an attempt to make sound decisions and fulfill,or fiduciary obligations to relevant parties. It’s serious business.
And then I see this Harf chick blathering on like a high school sophomore about understanding Daesh or finding them employment alternatives. It’s clownish at best. I’d say it’s a grotesque example as opposed to a good example. Whether one agrees with the administrations policy on DAESH or not, this Harf mess should be a public embarrassment of the first order for this state dept and this administration. Only the blindest partisans or paid dishonest shills could defend it. Shouldn’t they just quietly relieve her of her duties? And yet, maybe not. We have a President off golfing after a beheading, and doing selfie videos the day a woman’s death is confirmed. Yes, life goes on, but have some respect and be somewhat discreet. What kind of creep is this guy?
For a critique of Wood’s article, see Some Thoughts on Graeme Woods’ “What ISIS Really Wantsâ€
Thanks, sam. You’re right. It’s a good article. Note that it repeats several points that have been common themes around here.
I think it’s a criticism in the true sense rather than a critique of the original article since it’s mostly supportive of the original article but presents some suggestions on how the thesis of the article could be refined and improved. I may link to it here.