The only strategy

While the authorities continue to sort out the career of Omar Mateen, the killer who perpetrated the greatest mass killing in American history, U.S. strategy remains confused.
There never has been a question of the enormous potential for Daesh [ISIS or ISIL] to inflict suffering on Americans and other Westerners. The world has rarely seen such naked brutality. But alas! it is that dramatic aspect of the Daesh cult which attracts psychopaths, particularly from the Moslem world, to its colors, even attracting other terrorists. Its weapons in the fight with U.S. authorities are formidable. As its followers sometimes boast, it believes in death not in life as do its victims. Suicide bombers are an almost invincible enemy. Relying on old Moslem concepts, it justifies any deceit of non-believers if it can be rationalized as promoting Islam, something no other religion condones.
The infinitely complicated arguments over how to go after suspicious individuals who may be hidden terrorists has dominated the headlines and the conversations about a breakdown in American security. But in the end, proposed reforms are insufficient to prevent other attacks such as these
That is because the U.S. could not be a more attractive target for the Islamic terrorists. An open society, the first thing to acknowledge is that there are tens of thousands of potential American targets like the gay nightclub in Orlando. It is true, of course, that there were ”mistakes” in handling Mateen when he came under official U.S. scrutiny. But as FBI spokesmen have admitted, there are dozens, perhaps hundreds, of potential Mateens in this country, and thousands more who could be infiltrated with relative ease given our immigration problems and the opportunities afforded through worldwide commerce and tourism.
There is, of course, a strong argument for tightening up our security procedures. But the reality is that were we to move beyond a certain line in addressing the issue of suppressing terrorists among us, we would emasculate our hard fought civil liberties, the essence of the American political system. That, of course, is precisely what the Moslem terrorists intend: to create an atmosphere of such suspicion and repression that the whole concept of American liberty which they detest would be lost.
Pres. Barack Obama and Democratic Party presumptive presidential candidate Hillary Clinton avoid the use of the words Islamic terrorists and any other attributes that associate these acts with the religion of Islam. They may have a very pragmatic argument for doing so; that is, official association of terrorism with the religion of Islam may encourage new anti-Western sentiments among its 1.2 billion adherents around the world.
But if so, their logic is at fault. We opposed Nazism despite the assumption that there were millions of “good Germans” who opposed it. We went through the long Cold War opposing Soviet Communism even though we hoped that true Russian autocracy and its European culture were being suppressed. After those battles were won, internal opponents of the dictatorships more often than not, were quick to concede that their position was strengthened by Western resolve. Today we face a similar totalitarian opponent; Islam is not only a religious belief but it has always been indivisible from an attempt to create an authoritarian political regime. Even Mohammed, its founder, was a chief of government.
Pres. Obama has said U.S. strategy would “contain and dismantle” Daesh. In fact, ISIS has continued to grow, spreading its influence to other regions, and enlisting the support of radical Moslems everywhere.
The only strategy that the U.S. can successfully pursue is to go after ISIS in the same way the U.S. and its allies destroyed the Nazis and then Communism. It calls not only for an effective repression of Daesh but in a dramatic fashion that matches its own challenge, a strategy that calls on all our resources to destroy Islamic terrorism at its roots and quickly. That may not destroy the Islamicists’ concept. But anything less will lead to a long and debilitating struggle in which the priceless freedom of American life will be eroded and eventually destroyed.


2 responses to “The only strategy

  1. Margarete Healy

    Could not agree with you more. It shows your all-around knowledge of the world situation! Too bad there are not more writer with your perception.

  2. —– Original Message —–
    From: “Valerian”
    Sent: Friday, June 17, 2016 2:59 AM
    Subject: Only one strategy can answer the spreading blood lust of Islamic terrorism

    > Dear Sol,
    > I read your article on WorldTribune “Only one Strategy” with great interest.
    > Congratulation for your article.
    > As a US citizen from french origin I can look back at what happened in
    > the US and Europe
    > As you said in your article the strategy is confuse.
    > With no doubt, as the ISIS ideology is spreading all over the world, the
    > Occidental countries will have to go to fight directly on the battle field.
    > They did it successfully against the Nazis and the Communism.
    > But if we want to succeed again there are some prior requirements:
    > 1) Clearly name and define the enemy.
    > 2) Explain without ambiguity what makes this enemy unacceptable.
    > 3) Define realistic goals to achieve and place adequate ressources.
    > 4) Find and promote a counter ideology.
    > 5) Discredit ISIS ideology and belief.
    > 6) Eradicate the “6th column” that are the homegrown terrorists.
    > All these points are possible only if the state of war is declared: it
    > is a mobilization of all the country resources and it will be a very
    > long effort.
    > I am sure that for now the Citizens of the USA and Europe are not ready
    > to make these sacrifices.
    > My hope is that one day, sooner would be better, they will be ready.
    > Waiting for that moment, the occidental democracies should start the
    > preparation:
    > Points 1) and 2) are easy to get if we forget any culpability due to the
    > politically correctness.
    > Point 4) needs a long brainstorming and good understanding of our enemy.
    > Point 5) can come only after point 4) as they are linked.
    > Point 6) is a day to day work that have already started many years ago.
    > Alas without sufficient success.
    > In Europe or the US most of the terrorists are already known from the
    > Police.
    > Most of them have already been convicted for petty crimes.
    > Most of them are from a family with descendant from Muslim countries.
    > Well, as long as they do not commit a crime, we cannot put them in jail.
    > Only those coming back from fighting on ISIS side should be directly put
    > in jail.
    > For the others, we can do something after profiling:
    > A) Place an electronic surveillance bracelet and monitor their
    > displacements.
    > B) Ban them from a job link to safety (i.e.: security guard, airport
    > worker!).
    > C) Ban them from buying weapons.
    > D) Place them on a no fly list.
    > The USA are in a far better position than Europe, thanks to a better
    > immigration/border control and a Police/Justice efficiency.
    > But the ultimate goal will be achieved only if ISIS has lost its
    > “Califate” as Afghanistan was lost for Al Quaeda.
    > Well, may the democracies win.
    > Regards.
    > Valerian

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s