Is Daesh/Islamic State Gaining Strength and Is The Fight Against Them Going Badly?

[Martin Eden Mercury]

On Friday the 13th of November, the jihadist, terrorist group known as Islamic State or Daesh, launched almost simultaneous attacks, in multiple areas, in and around Paris France. During the Democratic presidential debate the very next day, two issues specifically came up: Is Daesh/Islamic State gaining strength, and is the fight against them going badly?

Two days after the debate, and three days after the attacks in France, the Washington Post ran an article addressing the dilemma the world faces in engaging terrorism in general, and in particular, Islamic extremists like Daesh. French President François Hollande, had addressed the French Parliament on Monday declaring "France is at war." But he also specifically rejected the rhetoric espoused by American politicians such as Donald Trump, Jeb Bush, Senator Marco Rubio and, closer to home, the far-right leader Marine Le Pen. "We are not committed to a war of civilizations, because these assassins don't represent any civilization," Hollande said. "We are in a war against terrorism, jihadism, which threatens the whole world." The dilemma is what to call them, what do they call themselves? Are their terror attacks proof of their strength, and proof the fight against them is going badly? How does this all square with reality?

In the past, Daesh has made some spectacular gains of land, but recently, some of those spectacular gains of land have been lost. In the larger picture outside of snapshots in time, Daesh does not seem to be expanding it's so-called Caliphate. Not beyond what it currently holds in small areas, inside of a few failed nation states. Earlier this year, the Guardian reported that the Australian PM, Tony Abbott, said he'd be using the term Daesh instead of Isil. Abbott said the name Deash deprives the group of legitimacy. One reality is we know Islamic State hates the name -- Daesh. Another reality is that throughout the 20th and 21st centuries, small numbers of radical extremists have banded together and waged terror campaigns. In each instance, the more spectacular a terrorist attack, the more media exposure it would get. But we know for a fact that the levels of media exposure did not equal any kind of strength. We Americans need only to look at the example of “the Oklahoma City Bomber,” a decorated hero of the Gulf War, one of Nature’s Eagle Scouts, Timothy McVeigh, whom the writer Gore Vidal highlighted in Vanity Fair, to measure media exposure as validity of strength. History and reality judged McVeigh and his cause as weak and pathetic. In the long run he accomplished little but evil.

Is the fight against Daesh going badly? By what measure? Do we measure it using a standard based on previous fights against terrorist organizations in the recent pasts of our lifetimes, or do we measure it by some new standard? Both here in the USA and abroad, many on the right would have us all base everything about Daesh, on a new standard of a clash of civilizations. Yet both President Obama, along with François Hollande, the President of France, reject that revisionist thinking. The reality is Daesh represents an extremist ideology, an idea. They do not represent a religion, or a culture, or a civilization. Wisdom says "You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea." - "You can kill terrorists but not the idea of terrorism." The fight they are waging does not appear to be furthering their stated goal, their mission, which is to gain enough adherents to actually install a true Caliphate in areas that are predominately Muslim. I believe the fight against them is not going as badly as many believe. The fight needs expanding to include, how to fight the ideology as well as the extremist elements on the ground.

President Obama, President Hollande, and other world leaders have shown great wisdom and strength in how they are approaching thing, whereas failed political candidates and right wing rabble-rousers worldwide have shown cowardliness and no shame in seeking opportunity to use any horrific tragedy for petty, partisan, political gain. Both Presidents follow in the tradition of the calm, steady hand of former President George W Bush, who six days after the September 11, attacks on the United States, went to a Mosque in Washington D.C. and declared "The face of terror is not the true faith of Islam. That's not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace. These terrorists don't represent peace. They represent evil and war."

 

[cereal_killer]

It's not going badly, it's just not accomplishing anything. We should abandon that whole area and let the peace loving Muslims deal with the problem. By the US, France, Russia and/or NATO getting involved in this 'war' it only serves as a recruiting tool for these psychopaths.

We should shore up our borders and take care of America/Americans. Let the peace loving Muslims deal with the problem. We'll have to bear witness to even more atrocities, but unfortunately thats what its going to take for the people in those regions to say "enough!!" and handle it themselves.

 

[Martin Eden Mercury]

Thank you Mr. cereal_killer. While I believe in a policy of rarely injecting oneself into comments pertaining to an op-ed, there are exceptions to every rule.

As an objective observer of President Obama's foreign policy, I see the President more or less focusing on longer term goals than on immediate ones. It can be frustrating. When President Obama does go to the podium to speak to the American people and the world, I hear him coming off more like an academic lecturing a class, than a political leader explaining, and molding public perceptions. He does not appear to enjoy confrontation. It's as though he believes when he wins an election, it absolves him from becoming personally involved in public, political fights. But, as an independent voice, I put these personal thoughts and feelings aside.

The paragraph above addresses the President and his leadership style in a personal way. Principles matter more than personality, and here is where the rubber hits the road so to speak: Daesh is losing ground. So it is simply untrue, and unfair to imply the strategy the President is backing is "not accomplishing anything."

What we should do? America belongs to NATO. We are tied at the hip with Europe. America belongs to other international organizations as well. We belong to and support the UN, the World Bank, and we have SEATO, the G8, et al. They were all formed after the two major world wars of the twentieth century, in order to keep capitalist democracy desirable and relevant in a future world. We do what we have to do in order to keep these organizations relevant, protecting our own strategic national interests in the process. The liberalism both economic and cultural, that America helped to spread across the world after the two major world wars of the twentieth century, is what we are defending. America no longer exists in a vacuum, if it ever did. Isolationism would ruin the world's economy and America's. Isolationism would bring about a modern dark age. Something jihadists and other extremists pray for.

We are slowly bringing Arab and African nations into a coordinated fight against extremism, but realities are our allies are dependent on mideast oil. The oil states both support and fight extremism. The schizophrenia of politics in the region is frightening to traverse. Every ally is a potential enemy and every enemy is a potential ally. We can and will defeat terrorist organizations on the ground. But this will not wipe out the ideas. We need to wipe out and destroy Daesh's physical facilities and economic infrastructures, but that alone leaves the ideas and ideals in place.

Europe and Japan, as well as mideast and African states, have always been home to terrorists and extremists fleeing accountability and justice Why are terrorists drawn to Belgium? | Kristof Clerix Red Brigades - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Informal Anarchist Federation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Vincenzo Vinciguerra - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ... and libertarians and other outliers with obvious agendas and forked tongues will always be there to make a profit, while lecturing us on false freedoms and false liberties Founder of app used by ISIS once said ‘We shouldn’t feel guilty.’ On Wednesday he banned their accounts. Telegram Messaging App Closes Channels Used by ISIS . Then we have the people who are demanding we sacrifice freedoms and liberties for a false sense of security and a public perception that we can live in a safe world, protected from our fellow man.

Mem

 

[cereal_killer]

I don't understand why the concept of "minding our own business" is labeled negatively (Isolationism). What has invading Iraq accomplished? What has blowing up Afghanistan accomplished? Libya? Is the world a 'better' place? Is it a safer place? Are we at peace around the world? The ONLY thing all these wars accomplish is more hatred for the west. We cannot defeat this ideology by dropping bombs. I understand it will make people feel better and I get that, but if the world wants to get rid of this evilness its going to take the Muslim countries to step up to the plate and fight it themselves. The more the West gets involved, the more the psychopaths can say "See? Come join our cause!" It doesn't take much to radicalize these men (and women).

Where are the Saudi's in this? Busy taking our money and funding terror is where. It's all a sham Mem. I could write a book on the lies we are fed daily. We won't even talk about the corruption and the bankers. It is in my opinion that America needs to wash its hands of this problem and look out for its own. If France and Russia want to have at it with Daesh, more power to them. Have fun, we'll watch from here.

 

[Martin Eden Mercury]

Embracing Isolationism, demands a view of the world that is distorted by warped perceptions of reality. I use a proverbial mirror, to watch, and to listen to people, whose views on foreign policy are molded by feelings of exasperation, and frustration over how events unfold in the world around them. I identify emotionally, but have learned to restrain emotion, and emotion alone, from dictating choices.

This segues nicely into the topic of my next op-ed.

thank you
Mem

 

[Bleipriester]

Is Daesh/Islamic State Gaining Strength
and
Is The Fight Against Them Going Badly?

No.

 

[MaryL]

Deash are like modern day Nazis,they are causing much animosity that NOBODY is going relate to them but a handful of hateful suicidal losers.They violate their own religious beliefs, and murder innocent people. Enough!

 

[Sunni Man]

Is Daesh/Islamic State Gaining Strength
and
Is The Fight Against Them Going Badly?

Yes

 

[Bleipriester]

 

[waltky]

Couple good programs on Charlie Rose this past week...

... `bout ISIS/Daesh, Paris, terrorists, jihadis, and their recent history...

... videos should still be available for free viewing.