A plan to defeat ISIS

[The Don]

Possibly, but are the Kurds more reliable than them as allies?

Well they seem to be at the moment and that's all that really matters

Of course when they've successfully established a Kurdish state and are using their oil revenue to mount terrorist campaigns to extend their territorial claims in Turkey, Syria, Iraq, Iran and maybe even Armenia I guess we'll deal with them then.

 

[Blaster]

You're obviously not aware that Islam has no central authority, no pope, nothing even close to it. A lot of the "fun" in the history of the religion has been for scholars to figure out what in hell "God" meant with his revelations, and the reason you can come up with such a "good idea" is that both Wahhabi and Zionist people with vast amounts of money and access to media have agreed in recent times, for different reasons, on what you should think "it is".

A lack of a pope or central authority doesn't preclude reformation. Basically scholars "figured out" everything the Quran and Hadith was about, and discouraged widespread interpretation through the practice of taqlid, or the "closing of the gate of ijtihad". The difference between taqlid and ijtihad is that one means to reason independently, and one means to follow.

The problem is that this was in the 10th century, and there's been a whole lot of goings on in the world since then.

There are groups, such as the Sisters in Islam, and scholars like Ustaz Mahmoud Mohammed Taha, who believe there are valid, modern interpretations of the Quran (the revelations from Mecca specifically) which don't stand in opposition to secularism or democracy at all, and that the relevations from Medina should only be viewed and interpreted in a historical context. However, Sisters in Islam is a minority in a minority, and Taha was executed for apostasy, but the idea is there, and at the very least should be nurtured in opposition to hardline, archaic groups like ISIS.

However, even if the likes of Taha took root in the Muslim wolrd and became the norm, there would be nothing preventing future abrogations which allowed a reverting back to more literal interpretations.

 

[TriangleMan]

Yes it does. There's no real philosophical difference between ISIS and states like Saudi and Qatar.

I'm sorry but if you think living in Qatar is similar to living in Daesh-controlled territory you are incorrect. How Qataris live their lives and run their country is very different from Daesh. I'm sure, like in any country, there is a small minority who are pro-Daesh or sympathetic towards them but every Qatari I've discussed the subject with (about a dozen so far) thinks Daesh are completely crazy.

 

[MaGZ]

I suspect MaGZ is being jocularly provocative, the naughty person, and what he really thinks is that the entire region should be rendered permanently uninhabitable and all its residents should be vapourised.

Wrong

 

[MaGZ]

I'm questioning whether it's a worthwhile long-term goal, to create a state which will almost certainly be a destabilising influence in the region. Kurdistan will already have implacable enemies in the form of Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran and by one remove will also have Russia agitating in the region. Kurdistan's oil wealth will enable it to fund insurrection (or terrorism if you prefer) in those countries.

All because we feel sorry for one ethnic grouping in a region full of ethnic groupings each with a set of territorial claims many of which conflict.

An independent Sunnistan and Kurdistan can not be any worse than the situation we have now.

 

[MaGZ]

Only because you think it makes sense. But just because you can come up with a narrative doesn't mean it's realistic.

It’s realistic that we can destroy their electrical grid and on the second or third week drop arms to an insurgent opposition. In time the Sunnis themselves can destroy ISIS.

 

[tuco]

An independent Sunnistan and Kurdistan can not be any worse than the situation we have now.

Perhaps its not up to us in the first place. Separatist tendencies been around the world for couple of decades now and as Crimea crisis suggested reconciling democracy with territorial integrity can become violent.

I realize we are just having debate, still maybe we should stop having plans for everyone as it seems it does not contribute to our own security as we were lead to believe.

 

[The Don]

An independent Sunnistan and Kurdistan can not be any worse than the situation we have now.

Oh, I'm pretty sure it could be.

A de-stabilised Turkey wouldn't be an ideal outcome, neither would a fragmented Iran, or problems in the Caucuses. We certainly shouldn't leap on it as a solution because it appears easy.

 

[Border Reiver]

It’s realistic that we can destroy their electrical grid and on the second or third week drop arms to an insurgent opposition. In time the Sunnis themselves can destroy ISIS.

Which insurgent opposition group?

Why are they preferable to, say another opposition group?

What if your preferred group is unable to destroy ISIS, or is destroyed by ISIS or another insurgent opposition group? How do you prevent blowback?

I'll ignore the armchair general idea of it being realistic to destroy an electrical grid in a week for now.

 

[Jules Galen]

It’s realistic that we can destroy their electrical grid and on the second or third week drop arms to an insurgent opposition. In time the Sunnis themselves can destroy ISIS.

How do you know that many Sunnis are not great supporters of ISIS? How do you know ISIS in parts of Iraq and Syria are not regarded as Hometown Heroes by the local Sunni populace?

I mean, before the Iraq Invasion, it was thought it was impossible that someone could regard Saddam the Butcher as a hero, but the people in Iraq's Sunni Triangle sure regarded Saddam as a hero - even named their babies after Saddam.

 

[marplots]

I mean, before the Iraq Invasion, it was thought it was impossible that someone could regard Saddam the Butcher as a hero, but the people in Iraq's Sunni Triangle sure regarded Saddam as a hero - even named their babies after Saddam.

I'm surprised they didn't name their babies before Saddam. What did they do, just call they "hey, you?"

 

[Jules Galen]

Just a thought to throw into the mix.
How about backing an Islamic Reformation?

Because...Islam has already had its Reformation and the varieties of Islam you see today are products of that movement that took Islam "Back-to-the-Book" so-to-speak. Due to Islam's Reformation, everything progressive was stripped and the Koran became the foundation of all religious practice - and Islam went backwards.

No...what Islam perhaps could use is a Counter-Reformation that would untie it from dogmatic adherence to the Koran and let it's societies grow.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Which insurgent opposition group?

Why are they preferable to, say another opposition group?

What if your preferred group is unable to destroy ISIS, or is destroyed by ISIS or another insurgent opposition group? How do you prevent blowback?

I'll ignore the armchair general idea of it being realistic to destroy an electrical grid in a week for now.

Is there even enough of a grid for that to be any serious threat?

 

[Toontown]

It is nearly certain that no miracle solution to the problem of ISIS is in the works, and far more certain that a solution will not miraculously emerge from this forum.

Those actually involved in trying to defeat ISIS have no more promising alternative than to simply continue targeting ISIS leaders, just as was done with al Qaeda, but with increasing efficiency as the technology advances.

Which is not to say the rank and file should not regularly be given opportunities to test their theory of divine generosity as well.

 

[Jules Galen]

It is nearly certain that no miracle solution to the problem of ISIS is in the works, and far more certain that a solution will not miraculously emerge from this forum.

I got a solution: we leave them alone. And they leave us alone.

 

[Blaster]

Because...Islam has already had its Reformation and the varieties of Islam you see today are products of that movement that took Islam "Back-to-the-Book" so-to-speak. Due to Islam's Reformation, everything progressive was stripped and the Koran became the foundation of all religious practice - and Islam went backwards.

No, this is not true. The reason ISIS is described as unIslamic is because they've ignored social and legal traditions that have developed out of that religion in the last 1400 years. This is a rejection of modernity by ISIS with a more literal interpretation. What is needing reformation is the ability for Muslims en masse to reinterpret sharia in such a way so as to repudiate the revelations from Medina which give ISIS authority to act a barbaric manner.

No...what Islam perhaps could use is a Counter-Reformation that would untie it from dogmatic adherence to the Koran and let it's societies grow.

Agreed, but good luck getting traction with that.

 

[Toontown]

I got a solution: we leave them alone. And they leave us alone.

History does not support your starry-eyed expectation that murderous psychopathic aggressors will in fact leave us alone if we leave them alone.

Without any credible expectation that they would leave us alone, your solution in just empty words, falling like silent raindrops into the well of silence.

 

[Jules Galen]

History does not support your starry-eyed expectation that murderous psychopathic aggressors will in fact leave us alone if we leave them alone.

So...why isn't ISIS attacking Switzerland? Or Mexico? Or Brazil? Or Japan?

Ya' think maybe that's because those countries don't bomb them?

 

[Blaster]

So...why isn't ISIS attacking Switzerland? Or Mexico? Or Brazil? Or Japan?

Well they recently executed a Chinese national as well as a Norwegian.

I don't recall Norway or China bombing ISIS, or doing anything in the middle-east really similar to the United States.

 

[Toontown]

So...why isn't ISIS attacking Switzerland? Or Mexico? Or Brazil? Or Japan?

Ya' think maybe that's because those countries don't bomb them?

No, I don't. I think if ISIS operatives, resources, and a plan of attack were ready in Switzerland today, they would attack, and ISIS would claim responsibility and provide some bogus pretext for the attack.

Iraq wasn't attacking ISIS, but ISIS still started attacking Iraq.

Syria wasn't attacking ISIS, but ISIS still started attacking Syria.

Lebanon wasn't attacking ISIS, but ISIS still attacked Lebanon.

And I'll confidently predict that other countries which have not attacked ISIS will be attacked in the future.