It is being reported that the leader of DAESH, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, has been killed during a raid by U. S. Special Forces. I will repeat what I said when Osama bin Laden was assassinated. It is of symbolic significance but don’t exaggerate its strategic significance.
Just as Al Qaeda and its affiliates continue to operate, not only will DAESH continue to operate, there will continue to be radical Islamist terrorist organizations whatever they’re called. Such organizations are endemic in Islam for reasons I’ve outlined previously and will continue to spring up as long as Islam itself exists.
That’s not a call to exterminate Islam—merely acceptance of reality. Modern communications and personal empowerment mean that we will need to be on watch for violent Islamist terrorist attacks with the potential of killing tens or even thousands of people forever.
Reportable, he detonated the suicide vest he must have worn daily.
So, his death was not a surprise to him and his successor has already been appointed.
Symbolism but positive symbolism for us. Good to see the guy gone. Good work.
Steve
In a disquieting finding; he was found in a part of Syria controlled by Turkey (not the part that Turkey is contesting with the Kurds recently).
Did Turkey know? If they did….
I am in a group of one. I do not see any additional threat to the US by ISIS. The US has spent several trillions of dollars and several thousand military deaths to save the 3,000 to 4,000 civilian lives potentially killed by al-Qaeda and others.
We spent 50 years in an espionage war with an advanced nuclear armed country, but we cannot track a few terrorist groups. I guess Putin should dismantle the nukes and move the Russian army into caves.
Islamic terrorist groups are a bigger threat to the Middle East countries than the US or Europe. The only reason the US and Europe are threatened is because al-Qaeda cannot easily attack the dictators they hate, but mostly, they are mass murders.
If these groups really wanted to destroy the West because of their decadence, they would be blowing up Hollywood, McDonalds, Amazon, Apple, etc., but no, most of them revel in the decadence. Several of the 9/11 terrorists were frequenting strip clubs. I guess it was for Allah.
The US does not need to be in the middle of the Middle East street brawl. Enforcing the ‘Marquess of Queensberry Rules’ to ensure fairness is madness. If two or more rabid dogs are fighting, fence them off, and let them fight.
US involvement is only delaying the eventual carnage. Does anybody really think that the US will remain until peace is achieved? At some point, the US will pull-out. Germany, Japan, and N. Korea are exceptions, but they were also formal wars.
Iraq and Iran were doing just fine before US intervention. If I were king, I would sell Iran the US’s old nukes. At some point they will get them, and this would save time, money, and lives on all sides.
For our esteemed ER doctor: I am not happy with President Trump keeping any troops in Syria, not pulling out all the troops he advertised, sending more troops to Saudi, and not pulling out the ones there already. If he is going to be another worthless interventionist, impeach the bitch.
Having Saudi pay for the troops sent there does not make them mercenaries. N. Korea, Europe, Germany, and Japan should be paying for their protection as well. If I understand correctly, their payments would make the troops mercenaries, and this would illicit demand to bring them home.
The First Gulf War was about enforcing Westphalian sovereignty as much as keeping the ‘oil flowing’. To the surprise of most, Bush the Elder did not continue into Iraq and finish Saddam Hussein. The goal was achieved, and he did not expand the mission.
We now know that he made the right decision, but his son was not quite as wise. Personally, we thought we would be leaving through the Baghdad Airport and the fighting would intensify. (As opposed to news reports, my task force spent three days in an ongoing tank battle.)
For the record, I think Bush the Elder was as worthless as his son, and if President Trump is Hillary-lite, he will get tossed onto the trash heap as well.
You do realize that the Saudis are basically cowards? That they hire soldiers from other countries to do their fighting? Mostly Pakistanis but now Sudanese. Now they have hired us. We clearly aren’t doing anything there to protect the US. Call our soldiers a human shield instead of mercenaries if that makes you feel better.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/sep/22/saudi-arabia-iran-us-middle-east-saudis
“The US does not need to be in the middle of the Middle East street brawl. Enforcing the ‘Marquess of Queensberry Rules’ to ensure fairness is madness.”
I agree with a lot of what you say here, and think you are taking some literally license here. What I would say is that we need to give up the neocon vision of turning all of these ME countries into pro-western democracies. We aren’t turning anyone into Sweden. Then we need to stop carrying out the foreign policy desires of other countries. We should act in our own interests.
Steve
Nor will they necessarily be Islamic, the stomach brothers will always need avenging, etc. The only answer is vigilance and carry on.
Referring to the United States of America , John Quincy Adams said in 1821:
The US military today is an ongoing business with many employees and vendors. They’re not going to just stand down and then ramp up at the next threat. The first objective of any organization is survival of the organization. The very existence of the US military in it’s present form is a threat to people everywhere because any other nation or people may be seen as a business opportunity for the MIC itself. It needs Presidents willing to fire generals.
@steve
Let me get this straight. During the Obama presidency, there was a vital national security interest in having troops in Saudi, but during the Trump presidency, they are mercenaries. I forgot, Trump bad.
If I am getting this correctly, the troops on the Korean border are preventing a N. Korean invasion of the US, and President Obama prevented an amphibious assault from the Taliban by increasing the number of troops in Afghanistan.
When President Obama exhales, he is helping plants grow, but when it is President Trump, he is polluting the environment.
Le the get this straight. We have had troops in Saudi Arabia for way too long, but we weren’t getting paid. Then the Saudis get attacked on home soil and they feel the need to pay the US to send a big batch of new soldiers. And this is just like our soldiers being there in the past? Trump could put up big billboards outside your front door saying “Soldiers for sale. Oil rich tyrants get special discounts!” and you would be explaining why this was exactly like the time Obama sent some troops to a Boy Scout Jamboree in Virginia.
Steve
@steve
Or, Trump bad.
Pretty dystopian, Tasty. I’m very sympathetic to your overall point. But I think the notion of a residual terror-fighting force requires a bit more consideration. Killing Baghdadi is in no way decisive, but significant.
I’m surprised no one has commented on not informing Pelosi. He probably should have – VERY late because his point is correct and I don’t trust the bitch as far as I could throw her; and perhaps its proper under past practice – but I think its delicious that he basically said to her “OK, if you want to play rough with your impeachment crap, I’ll play rough you filthy………..”
I went to play golf at about 2PM. At that time I don’t think any Democrat had even commented. (And the WaPo had beclowned themselves with their obit headlines) Then I heard Stabinow went on the tube and said sensible things and Schumer had a reasonable release. Pelosi’s statement about Russia was infantile. Third in line, people.
Kuwait and Saudia Arabia paid for about half of our financial costs for the first Gulf War in 1992.
I don’t think reimbursement for expenses makes us mercenaries in terms of the actual meaning of that word.
But honestly, I think Obama or Bush would have deployed forces to SA in the wake of the refinery attack. The only thing that makes this uniquely Trump is his demand for reimbursment.
His successor will also be called Al Baghdadi if that’s where he’s from.
In traditional Arab naming conventions there are no surnames. Patronymics (“Bin Laden’, son of Laden) are used. “Al Baghdadi” isn’t a surname. It’s a place name.
Under normal naming conventions there are actually five names. Your given name, a patronymic, an honorific (rarely used in print), a descriptive or epithet, and a surname. In some countries, e.g. Egypt, Lebanon, surnames are rare or not used at all.
Andy, it is not just the refinery but the Saudis losing fights with Yemen.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/sep/29/houthis-claim-killed-hundreds-saudi-soldiers-captured-thousands
Steve