JPF Home Page Forums General Messages General Message Forum An ISIS thread

Hi Bob:

While I think trouble often begins when a reader believes a comment on the internet is directed to him personally, I have to admit that, in this case, there is no harm (and possibly some good) in my doing so.

So, duly noted.

To get myself on topic: I think we all agree that ISIS is an imminent threat. The differences we may have are in how to deal with it.

Several folks here have posted statements along the lines of "he who ignores history is doomed to repeat it", an idea I strongly agree with. However, in all cases (I think), they were referring to our delay in entering World War II - with the implication that, had we entered earlier, many lives might have been saved. I agree with this too, though we have the unfair advantage of looking back on things...

Here's the thing though - If you're going to acknowledge the importance of history in decision making, you can't cherry pick. So yes, we have to consider WW2. But we also have to consider what happens when we arm someone just because they are fighting a common enemy (Afghanistan against Russia), what happens when we prop up a middle east dictator (the Shah of Iran) and what happens when we don't understand the people of the country we are invading (the Iraqis will greet us as liberators).

What's the answer? Hell if I know. I spend all my time trying to learn more thermodynamics and differential equations so that I can do a better job teaching them. I can't be an expert in Mideast affairs too. So I can only hope that the folks in charge of answering this threat are as good at their job as I am in mine - and that they take it as seriously as I do mine.

I DO have a sense that this particular threat requires cool heads that take ALL relevant history into account. In that sense, I have some confidence in this administration (maybe, like Aaron, 80%, maybe a little less). Certainly more confidence than I would have had in alternative administrations.

I do believe this threat has to be addressed and sooner rather than later. But history does not support the two most obvious actions (US-only ground forces or arming others). I think there has to be a broad coalition - which seems feasible not because of our expertise in diplomacy but because we have a terrorist group that has gone out of its way to alienate everyone. Coalition building takes some time though - I hope our leaders are using it wisely.

I do NOT believe that the President, with his recent statements, is lecturing American citizens on the benefits of Islam. Rather, I think he is trying to drive a wedge between the terrorists and the (Muslim) man on the street. I guess I think it's worth trying but I don't have much hope that it will succeed.

Thanks for posting the link to that article, Kevin. Certainly helps to define the scope of the problem.

Scott