THE DEFEAT OF THE ISLAMIC STATE…..THEN WHAT?

So the US game plan is to destroy the Daesh once and for all! Mosul is key in that concept. Iraq and Syria are vital to the desired goal of the US.  So, let me ask a question, one that many others have been asking without hearing a whole lot of logical answers from Western governments or their armies of Talking Heads.

Then what?

I’ve heard tons of rhetoric [DS1] and bombastic statements about the Daesh from just about anyone involved in the fight to defeat the movement, but as the commercial use to say, “Where’s the Beef”? Will taking Mosul or Raqqa bring order to the region? Is order in the region the goal? Without “order” will the next version of Radical Islamic Terrorism simply fill the void? That’s the theory of most scholastic “experts”.

Here is the problem. The Donald didn’t sign up to solve the issues of the region. He signed up to destroy the Daesh. Is that goal accomplished by taking a few strategic, destroyed cities? News flash. The mission at the damn in Iraq was far more important than taking Raqqa or Mosul. Dig into it a little bit and you will see why.

A Symptom, not the Disease:

So, we all wake up in a few months and the major cities, territories held by Daesh have been recaptured? Recaptured by whom? The Kurds with help from the US? The Syrian government and the Iraqi government with one being supported by the Russians and the other being supported by the West. Oh ya……and both being supported by the Persians…still hard to figure that one out! So that’s it? Game over? No more Terrorism spawned from the region? Yep. Stupid comment and even the political pundits, who get briefed on events only to rush to the screen to show how smart they are, know better.

The Daesh and all those like it are symptoms, not the disease of what is taking place. The liberals will tell you the disease is social inequality. The Religious thinkers will tell you it’s the byproduct of a flawed religion.  The historical scholars will say it’s nothing more than an extension of historical conflict.  All of them are correct and all of them don’t have a clue what it will take to bring peace to the region. Yes, the Muslim world is at war with itself and yes it has been for over a thousand years. The breaks in the conflict have come only when the real threat to their worlds has come from outside their religion. Unique to the Muslim faith? Need I bring up the Catholics and the Protestants, whose very name speaks of revolt and conflict?  

Yes, there is tactical value in shooting the five meter target given the closest threat is most often the most dangerous one. Confronting the actions of groups like Daesh must take place. People must know the threat is being addressed, even when it is “addressed” over and over again.  But the end of a geographically located Daesh will not lead to the end of terrorist acts in the world. It may make planning complex events more difficult, but the acts such as those in London yesterday will not go away.

Five years ago, I wrote about the War on Terrorism and the concept of the West playing, “Whack a Mole”. It’s the game we have been playing and it’s the game we will continue to play until something much larger and drastically more dangerous comes along. Everyone watches the almost daily brush fires of Terrorism and some talk of a death from a thousand cuts, but when a true fire, a Forest Fire, starts the Brush Fires will simply be left to burn.

Dragon’s don’t start Brush Fires. The Dragon starts Forest Fires.

---

 [DS1]