Iraq: The Trilogy

Now We have a Real World-wide Threat in ISIS and 

It’s High Time We Settled this Mess

(There’s Probably a Good Idea in Here Somewhere)

Like all landmark movies, good or bad, the players remain on contract for three releases.  Let's do this one right.

A little synopsis for those of you who haven’t been following the As Iraq Burns saga:

The United States has dealt with Iraq under multiple administrations in a fairly straight-forward and civil way.  After years of sanctions for bad behavior, Iraq under Saddam Hussein, still went flouncing into Kuwait to suck up the oil fields – warnings were given, forces built up, and deadlines set.  The coalition of nations under President Bush-41 kicked them out resoundingly, but stopped short of the regime change mark.  Saddam went on being a world pariah and funder of terrorism.  President Clinton ignored Saddam as best he could.  President Bush-43 & the Cheney-ettes won the battle but made a HUGE miscalculation about nation-building (‘We won’t have to do it’ – hah!  ‘Six guys and a tambourine are all that’s required to run Iraq post-Saddam’ – double hah!).  And President Obama ran from the situation like it was the one campaign promise he was going to keep no matter how ill thought out this was.

ISIS militants clad in black
(although it appears some couldn't resist the Michael Jordans)

Some facts (assumptions?) to stipulate:

• While Al-Qaeda is bad, ISIS is badder
• ISIS has shown a disease-like ability to recruit and procure resources, even govern
• They’ve also demonstrated a viciousness that does not sit well with the secular natives, nor even some of their own recruits
• Lastly, the U.S. is tired of Iraq, and the Middle East in general 

One way or another, the ISIS tree requires a severe pruning; enough to allow neighboring states to keep it down and its own root rot to take hold.   

Some suggestions:

Coalition time! – Round up the usual suspects

The brutality and wickedness of ISIS is almost comic book-like in its capacity to alienate and threaten other groups and nations.  Use this to make a coalition, like last week, particularly in the Middle East region – the Arab League has practically been crying for U.S.-led action. 

Wake NATO up too – To the Administration’s credit, this started last week. 

Per a statement from Secretaries Kerry and Hagel:

“We and the Ministers agreed here today that there is no time to waste in building a broad international coalition to degrade and, ultimately, to destroy the threat posed by [ISIS].”  But then Kerry goes on to say they are going to (think about starting to?) form this coalition and do some more talking about a plan in two weeks.  Why not today?

Show some real leadership!

Leadership is often about making hard decisions and motivating people to do what they would not ordinarily do (what kind of leader does it take to say, “Let’s go get ice cream!”?)

Tell the American people what we are going to do and why (Editor's Note:  Apparently this is happening prime time on Wednesday - hope it's convincing).  You’ve got the poster-child of bad guys in ISIS and historical precedence in 9/11.

What are we going to do? 

 “’To mystify, mislead, and surprise the enemy,’ is one of the first principles in war.”  (Sun Tzu – The Art of War, perhaps ~500 B.C.)  Why are we giving this up?  It costs lives.

First, stop making promises to our enemies about what we’re NOT going to do.*  

     Keep ‘em guessing.

Second, stop publishing timelines, and stop discussing secret missions, successful or otherwise.  In fact, for awhile, just stop talking and start doing.

Third, PUT BOOTS ON THE GROUND – Drop the pretense that no one’s going in harm’s way, including those troops we already have there.  We’ve doubled down twice to 820 advisers and “troops protecting the embassy.”  They are on the ground, they are in Iraq.  Therefore, they are in danger.

Deploy Special Forces as a force multiplier.  In the wake of the 9/11 attack, the American military marshalled and guided the opposing Afghanistan clans to topple the Taliban structure in two short months, largely through embedded Special Forces and air power.  Do this again.

Lastly, attack ISIS hard in Syria first – hit them where it counts.  Tell Syria later.**

Forms of support

Open some more intelligence channels through some of the 22 Arab League nations.

Start turning and mobilizing the Sunni’s under ISIS control; provide Sunni’s a spot at the power table under the new prime minister or a path to independence.

Appeal to the actual ISIS soldiers – a lot of them may not be entirely comfortable with this raping, torturing, mass-murdering form of Islam

ISIS seems to have effective marketing and IT (even hijacking World Cup and Napa quake Tweets to recruit) – nullify this.  The U.S. is full of marketing gurus, so employ some and make a worldwide campaign.  We also have hackers – what better exercises for attendees at Black Hat and DEF CON than to terrorize and shut down ISIS IT?  Oh, and keep up the ISIS parodies.

Enlist the new Iraqi government and select Arab League nations to plan for the future.

The hard part – Dealing with what remains and filling the void

ISIS will scatter when it meets real force, and militants that came from many nations may become terrorists.   Eliminating their extensive financial resources (oil wells, freezing of assets) will scale down the terrorist capabilities.  We’ll need to hunt down their leadership, track active cells and monitor as usual.  We’ve played a highly effective game of Whack-a-Mole with Al-Qaeda since 2011, we can do the same here.

Lastly, there will be a void when ISIS falls.  We must strengthen the Kurds and advise the new Iraqi government as it either forms an inclusive leadership or splits up along secular lines.  The U.S. can support the moderate forces opposed to Assad, while they root out or contain what ISIS forces remain in the cities.  The ultimate fate of Syria may be left to the surrounding nations of Turkey, Jordan and Saudi Arabia, with U.S. input, but some U.S. forces and political operatives will remain in the Iraqi region for years to come.  Turns out, leaving American troops behind to stabilize post-war regions is a tried and true strategy; bugging out isn't.  So much for being tired of the Middle East.

Simple, eh?

*    For example, one year ago today (10 Sep 13), President Obama addressed the nation in the wake of the Syrian chemical weapons attack, and Assad’s ongoing killing of over 100,000 citizens (it’s now over 170,000), and creation of millions of refugees:

“The situation profoundly changed, though, on August 21st, when Assad’s government gassed to death over a thousand people, including hundreds of children.  The images from this massacre are sickening…  

Let me explain why.  If we fail to act, the Assad regime will see no reason to stop using chemical weapons. ”

     BUT 
“I will not put American boots on the ground in Syria.  I will not pursue an open-ended action like Iraq or Afghanistan.  I will not pursue a prolonged air campaign like Libya or Kosovo.”

Luckily and ironically for the Administration at the time, President Putin stepped in, and America didn’t have to find out just what options were left.


**    I realize this strategy could involve significant risk to manned aircraft as I alluded to in my prior post.  I would recommend utilizing drones, long range air-to-ground and cruise missiles for this first operation.  We could come to an "understanding" with Assad on how to safely conduct future missions (we can add his infrastructure to our list of targets, or he can let us go about our business of destroying his most effective foe).