A plan to defeat ISIS

[CapelDodger]

My out-of-the-box solution would be a single federal authority over all the territory from the Sinai Desert to the Zagros mountains, guaranteeing certain basic human rights, and an otherwise highly-devolved administration. Nation-states are not normal in that region, they're an import, and an inappropriate one to my mind.

 

[Mikemcc]

The most effective way to get rid of ISIS? Take over. Put together a coalition of first-world countries, and divvy up the middle east. We have all the guns, all the money, all the power. Just go in and set up shop. There's enough room that we can share all of the middle east between the US, the European Union (I'll let you guys decide how to share it out among member countries), Russia, and *maybe* China if we're feeling magnanimous. The divisions become subject to the laws and regulations of the ruling country/union. Easy peasy.

Not, however, particularly ethical. But probably pretty darned effective

That really worked so well in Afghanistan and Iraq!

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

That really worked so well in Afghanistan and Iraq!

It would have, if we had done so. Military efforts in both fronts were limited inadequate. Kicking the top off an anthill does not conquer the anthill. In neither war were borders secured, roadways secured, cities secured.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

There is no "effective" way: the asymmetry of the conflict means it's easier for ISIS to keep going than it is to fight them. Massive force, like carpet bombings or nukes will work as recruitment tools.

 

[Emily's Cat]

That really worked so well in Afghanistan and Iraq!

To be fair, we didn't actually take over and annex either Afghanistan or Iraq. I'm not talking about being a temporary occupying force with the intent to keep peace. I'm talking about a hostile takeover and full-fledged integration. Make them states 51+.

 

[Dave Rogers]

The most effective way to get rid of ISIS? Take over. Put together a coalition of first-world countries, and divvy up the middle east. We have all the guns, all the money, all the power. Just go in and set up shop. There's enough room that we can share all of the middle east between the US, the European Union (I'll let you guys decide how to share it out among member countries), Russia, and *maybe* China if we're feeling magnanimous. The divisions become subject to the laws and regulations of the ruling country/union. Easy peasy.

We tried that in 1918, and it pretty much ended up with where we are now.

Dave

 

[Emily's Cat]

We tried that in 1918, and it pretty much ended up with where we are now.

Dave

We did? Any chance you could tell me what to google to find out more?

 

[Dave Rogers]

We did? Any chance you could tell me what to google to find out more?

There's a Wikipedia article on the partitioning of the Ottoman Empire that's a decent starting point. It wasn't exactly what you're suggesting, but Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Palestine were divided up between Britain and France as protectorates.

Dave

 

[Mikemcc]

It would have, if we had done so. Military efforts in both fronts were limited inadequate. Kicking the top off an anthill does not conquer the anthill. In neither war were borders secured, roadways secured, cities secured.

The initial military efforts were exceptionally effective, what messed up in the end was the lack of an effective political and social plan to deal with the events afterwards.

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

The initial military efforts were exceptionally effective, what messed up in the end was the lack of an effective political and social plan to deal with the events afterwards.

Yes, exactly. Rumsfeld kicked the top off the anthill then tried to stuff different ants in one by one. Failed in both wars.

The "exceptionally effective" military efforts were that the US chased Bre'r Taliban straight into the Tora Bora briar patch.

In Iraq, Zarkawi had tactic presence in Baghdad before Rumsfeld.

 

[Emily's Cat]

There's a Wikipedia article on the partitioning of the Ottoman Empire that's a decent starting point. It wasn't exactly what you're suggesting, but Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Palestine were divided up between Britain and France as protectorates.

Dave

Thanks!

 

[phiwum]

A college friend of mine was once given an essay assignment: "How to solve Middle East problem?" (That was back in 1983 or '84).

He handed in a one-sentence essay: "Fifty megatons will do the job".

If I remember correctly, professor gave him a "C".

Grade inflation struck early, I suppose.

Just to be clear, if the student actually argued that this was the best solution, then he might have earned a decent grade. But one sentence doesn't do it.

 

[CapelDodger]

Grade inflation struck early, I suppose.

Just to be clear, if the student actually argued that this was the best solution, then he might have earned a decent grade. But one sentence doesn't do it.

The question as given here is "How to solve", not "How best to solve".

 

[LSSBB]

Yes, exactly. Rumsfeld kicked the top off the anthill then tried to stuff different ants in one by one. Failed in both wars.

The "exceptionally effective" military efforts were that the US chased Bre'r Taliban straight into the Tora Bora briar patch.

In Iraq, Zarkawi had tactic presence in Baghdad before Rumsfeld.

One of the lessons learned from Panama, taught in War College, was a massive amount of boots on the ground is needed after invasion to essentially hold the peace. Also, post WW II much of he vanquished nations police and government was reused. In Iraq the boots were pulled too early by Rumsfeld and the Ba'athists were given the boot. Hence thw Surge became necessary. Afghanistan had even less of a U.S. presence, and the Taliban have taken up residence on the periphery.

 

[McHrozni]

One of the lessons learned from Panama, taught in War College, was a massive amount of boots on the ground is needed after invasion to essentially hold the peace. Also, post WW II much of he vanquished nations police and government was reused. In Iraq the boots were pulled too early by Rumsfeld and the Ba'athists were given the boot. Hence thw Surge became necessary. Afghanistan had even less of a U.S. presence, and the Taliban have taken up residence on the periphery.

I agree with the analysis for Iraq, but Afghanistan was a different matter entirely. It was never taken by the US, but rather the US forces merely assisted (heavily) the existing local rebellion to largely defeat the Taliban.

Massive boots on the ground after that would likely be counterproductive.

McHrozni

 

[LSSBB]

I agree with the analysis for Iraq, but Afghanistan was a different matter entirely. It was never taken by the US, but rather the US forces merely assisted (heavily) the existing local rebellion to largely defeat the Taliban.

Massive boots on the ground after that would likely be counterproductive.

McHrozni

I agree for Afghanistan in that US forces were in an assist role. The primary Afghan forces were insufficient to secure the country.

 

[The Don]

I agree for Afghanistan in that US forces were in an assist role. The primary Afghan forces were insufficient to secure the country.

Given the history in Afghanistan, it would seem that any feasibly-sized force is insufficient to secure the country against the will of a decent-sized minority of the people.

 

[LSSBB]

Given the history in Afghanistan, it would seem that any feasibly-sized force is insufficient to secure the country against the will of a decent-sized minority of the people.

You have a good point. I thought from the start that it would be like trying to subjugate a bunch of hillbillies. You'll never stop the fueding, even when using their own folks. Because the government is really just another clan there.

 

[LSSBB]

You have a good point. I thought from the start that it would be like trying to subjugate a bunch of hillbillies. You'll never stop the fueding, even when using their own folks. Because the government is really just another clan there.

...and in retrospect, much of the Middle East is the same way.

 

[CapelDodger]

Afghanistan had even less of a U.S. presence, and the Taliban have taken up residence on the periphery.

There are always wildlings lurking in the peripheries : the central task of civilisation is to keep them penned in their mountains/desert/frozen wastes. It's rarely possible to eradicate them. What's happened recently is that central authority has broken down in Libya, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and arguably Pakistan and the barbarians have taken advantage, as usual.