Happy Armchair Warriors

The recent terrorist attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, California, have thrown the debate about ISIS into overdrive, particularly among the presidential candidates.  Several strands have emerged from these discussions, but I think that their taxonomy is not often clearly laid out.  I would therefore like to try to do this.

 

This undated image posted by the Raqqa Media Center, a Syrian opposition group, on Monday, June 30, 2014, which has been verified and is consistent with other AP reporting, shows fighters from the al-Qaida linked Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) during a parade in Raqqa, Syria. Militants from an al-Qaida splinter group held a military parade in their stronghold in northeastern Syria, displaying U.S.-made Humvees, heavy machine guns, and missiles captured from the Iraqi army for the first time since taking over large parts of the Iraq-Syria border. (AP Photo/Raqqa Media Center)IS military parade in Mosul

Photo credit: Raqqa Media Center / AP

 

I think that there are three inter-related strands to the discussion, which I summarize below:

 

  • Military action against ISIS in Syria and Iraq
  • Protecting the border (including the related issue of profiling)
  • Data privacy

 

Today, I would like to discuss the case for military action against ISIS.

The argument here is that, in order for the world to defend itself against terrorism, ISIS must be defeated in its homeland.  ISIS must be denied territory.  This position is supported by, among the major Republican candidates, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio and Chris Christie.

Less clear are the positions of Donald Trump and Ted Cruz, who are both reluctant to engage in further foreign interventions, but who also make belligerent noises about ISIS.  The only candidate who is consistently and unambiguously against military escalation is Rand Paul.

The undercard of the Republican debates, however, features the most aggressive proponent of escalation, Senator Lindsey Graham.  Graham is the only candidate in either party proposing “boots on the ground.”  He has recently reiterated this stand in an editorial in The Wall Street Journal entitled “How to Defeat ISIS Now – Not ‘Ultimately.’

 

john-mccain-lindsey-grahamJohn McCain and Lindsay Graham: the happy warriors

Photo credit: Getty Images

 

He wrote the article with his Senate colleague, and fellow happy warrior, John McCain.  Since they are such vocal advocates of escalation, let’s use their article as the standard bearer for the position. As the title implies, Senators McCain and Graham presume that defeating ISIS should be a goal of American foreign policy, a goal that they clearly link to the fight against terrorism:

 

In his address on national television Sunday night, President Obama insisted that he has a strategy to destroy…ISIS.  But what Americans see instead is an incremental, reactionary, indirect approach that assumes that time is on our side.  It is not.  The danger is growing nearer: from attacks in Paris and Beirut, to the bombing of a Russian airliner, to the Islamic State-inspired shooting in San Bernardino, Calif.

 

The Senators implicitly claim that only by defeating ISIS in its heartland can we protect ourselves in San Bernardino.  They apparently don’t feel that this linkage requires justification, just treating it as a self-evident truth.  But it is far from obvious that ISIS’ control of territory materially increases its willingness and ability to commit the type of attacks that we have recently seen in Paris and San Bernardino.

 

ISTerritory controlled by the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq as of late 2015 – click to enlarge.

 

Interventionist Arguments

I have seen three arguments put forth by the proponents of attacks on ISIS:

 

  • ISIS’ prestige is enormously enhanced by its occupation of territory and its declaration of a caliphate.  Among other things, it is a demonstration to the devout that God is on their side.  This is an essential recruiting tool for the movement.
  • ISIS uses its controlled territory to plot assaults – “Apocalyptic terrorists cannot be allowed to have sanctuary in ungoverned spaces, from which to plan attacks against the West,” to use the wording of the Senators – and train attackers.
  • ISIS uses the financial resources arising from its territory – taxes and natural resources, such as oil – to further its terrorist activities.

 

These are the arguments for why ISIS must be defeated militarily in order to weaken its ability to commit acts of terror.  But there is a forth element required to make the argument complete, as  even the Senators admit.  The fourth element is that ISIS must be replaced with stable regimes that can and will permanently repress the group or any of its successors.

Let’s examine each of these four elements in turn.

To my mind, the validity of the first step comes down to the following question: Which is the more effective recruiting tool for ISIS, (a) the prestige of declaring and holding a caliphate or (b) the ability to point to bombs falling on Muslim brothers?  Although I cannot, fortunately, put myself in the mind of an Islamic terrorist, I don’t think that there is any doubt that (b) wins.

It is obvious that the terrorist attacks are “blowback” against military action against ISIS.  This is clearly seen in the bombing of the Russian plane, which was only targeted after Russia commenced military action in Syria.  The terrorists in Paris were reported to have shouted references to Syria and Iraq during their spree.

 

syria-in-ruins-16Syria lies in ruins – nearly every bomb dropped in the region drives more recruits into the arms of extremist groups like IS

Photo credit: Khaled Tellawi / Shaam News Network

 

A recent terrorist knifing in London also involved the attacker shouting references to Syria.  I think that only the deliberately obtuse could deny that blowback anger makes a better recruiting poster than territorial occupation.

I am equally unconvinced of the validity of the second element.  The San Bernardino terrorists, for example, were “inspired” by ISIS, but never trained nor plotted from this area.   Certain of the Paris terrorists had trained or fought in Syria, but I can’t see that this was essential to the attacks they committed.

The reality is that these are low-tech assaults upon soft targets.  The idea that the attackers require an ungoverned sanctuary to carry out their plotting or training is nonsense.  Almost any suburban living room would serve.

 

San BernSan Bernardino attackers Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik – quite possibly inspired by ISIS, but they certainly didn’t need the self-anointed Caliphate to commit the attack. Islamist fundamentalist ideology cannot be eradicated militarily.

Photo credit: Reuters

 

The third argument – the financial one – is probably the strongest, but even this one fails to compel.  I repeat, these attacks are low tech assaults upon soft targets which do not require a great deal of financial support.  The San Bernardino attackers, for example, were able to fund themselves, with a little help from an online “P2P” lender .

The attacks in France were more expensive, but even they would not have required anywhere near the financial resources of an ISIS.   Although ISIS requires state-like revenues to support its military actions, this is not true of its terrorism.

 

The Failure of Nation-Building

But it is with the last element that the proponents of military action against ISIS really fail to make their case.  Our experience in Afghanistan and Iraq – both places where we defeated our enemies militarily, as the proponents of military action against ISIS somehow forget – shows that we cannot win the war against ISIS unless we can also win the peace.

Otherwise, our enemies will simply melt away, waiting for the inevitable slackening of our resolve to re-emerge, just as the Taliban have done in Afghanistan and just as the Sunni supporters of Saddam Hussein did in Iraq (before becoming, among other things, ISIS).

Senators McCain and Graham acknowledge this in their article, which contains quotes such as:

 

Iraqis must win the peace, but Americans have a major stake in their success, and a unique role to play in helping them.  The only way to do so is to be present.

 

And:

 

At the same time, Islamic State’s ability to spread is directly related to the collapse of political order.  Unless America does more to help these countries make the transition to just and inclusive governments, Islamic State will find havens to pursue its evil ends.

 

And finally:

 

So the U.S. should lead an effort to assemble a multinational force…[to] destroy Islamic State in Syria.  Such a force could also help to keep the peace in a post-Assad Syria, as was done in Bosnia and Kosovo.  Here, too, if the West wins the war and leaves, it should not be surprised if violence and extremism return.

 

In other words, what the happy warriors have to offer is the same old “nation building” mantra that the neoconservatives have been chanting forever, combined with an apparent willingness to garrison these regions in perpetuity.

And right on cue they have defaulted to Bosnia and Kosovo as the lone alleged success story for this strategy, which is in fact no success at all and where we have recently been treated to Kosovan parliamentary debates featuring tear gas attacks from the opposition, as proof of the vibrant democracy we have fostered.

KosovoParliamentary debate, Kosovo-style: tear-gassed by the opposition.

Photo credit: AFP

 

But probably the most amazing thing about the article is the total lack of proportionality.  Although tragic, the 14 deaths and 22 injuries in San Bernardino would have been, in the Detroit of my youth, about an average tally for a hot summer weekend.  Yet in response to this, Senators McCain and Graham want us to embark on a Pax Americana which has been shown to work exactly nowhere.

Looking at this, it is hard to resist the notion that they are spoiling for a fight and since they can’t claim that ISIS is developing weapons of mass destruction, San Bernardino will have to do.

 

Dubious Logic

Although Senators McCain and Graham would lead us into a massive overreaction, this should not be interpreted as an endorsement of the current policy of the Obama administration (and, by extension, the proposed policy of Hillary Clinton, which is basically the same with a “no-fly zone” added to show that she is more butch than her former boss).

Obama’s policy uses enough military action to expose us to “blowback” attacks and keep the ISIS recruiters busy, yet is insufficient to actually achieve military victory.  From the standpoint of the America’s interests, this is not as barmy as the proposals from the happy warriors, but it isn’t much better.

It should be noted that American politicians are not the only ones pursuing this dubious logic.  Russia’s Vladimir Putin and the UK’s David Cameron have also decided that the best way to fight terrorism is to put their countries in harm’s way for more of it.

Even Francois Hollande, on behalf of a country not known for its martial appetite, has joined in.  It is hard to see this as anything but the deplorable universal tendency for politicians to need to do something, no matter how misguided.

 

bomb somethingThe UK government’s reaction to the Paris Attacks

Cartoon by Steve Bell

 

Conclusion – We Have no Dog in this Fight

I continue to believe, as I stated way back in September 2013, that we don’t have a dog in this fight.  San Bernardino doesn’t change the calculation.  ISIS will eventually collapse under its own homicidal and parasitical weight, probably with the help of one or more of its neighbors, whose inactivity and divisiveness we currently underwrite.

Then ISIS will be replaced by something better…or worse…it is impossible to know in this region.  In the interim, we and our European friends should focus our efforts on isolating ourselves from the madness.  And we certainly should not go out of our way to draw further fire.

 

Map by Discover History

 

Image captions by PT

 

This article was originally posted at Economic Man.

Roger Barris is an American who has lived in Europe for over 20 years, now based in the UK. Although basically retired now, he previously had senior positions at Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank, Merrill Lynch and his own firm, initially in structured finance and latterly in principal and fiduciary investing, focussing on real estate. He has a BA in Economics from Bowdoin College (summa cum laude) and an MBA in Finance from the University of Michigan (highest honors).

 

 
 

Emigrate While You Can... Learn More

 
 

 

Dear Readers! We are happy to report that we have reached our turn-of-the-year funding goal and want to extend a special thank you to all of you who have chipped in. We are very grateful for your support! As a general remark, according to usually well informed circles, exercising the donation button in between funding drives is definitely legal and highly appreciated as well.

   

Bitcoin address: 1DRkVzUmkGaz9xAP81us86zzxh5VMEhNke

   
 

6 Responses to “ISIS – the Case for Non-Intervention”

  • Hans:

    Mr Barris, the real problem of nation building has been the utter and complete
    failure of Muslame society. They can not even live peacefully within their own
    religion, let alone build anything near to a democracy.

    The circumstances in Afganstan lends itself to a certain military defeat. Other Middle
    East involvements should be concise and brief as it is akin to cleaning, the dirt ALWAYS
    returns, especially in this region.

    American blood and treasure must be applied with diligence and reservation or our
    military might will erode, with others filling the void.

    The Middle East is an abscess and any treatment is temporal.

    • Roger Barris:

      Hans:

      I agree that nation building cannot succeed because the cultural foundation for building a tolerant, secular, modern and democratic society does not exist. But the point of my article is that, without successful nation building (allowing us to “win the peace”), we cannot succeed militarily. As you say, the dirt will always come back. So, what do we hope to accomplish here?

      Roger

      • Hans:

        Mr Barris, ask the Romans about nation building. This phrase comes from the
        thousands-points-of-lights family, in Kennebunkport, Maine.

        The military task is not to advance liberties and democracy but to
        destroy the evil opposition. If a peaceful society develops because
        of the former, so much the better.

        We rid Afganstan of the Taliban (students) mission completed.
        We rid Irack of Saddam, mission completed.

        As Mr Galt has stated, there is a complete void of yearning for
        individualism, replaced by the Koran, in which the MEM (Middle
        East Man) does not either comprehend or desires liberty due to
        a collectivist doctrine.

        There are vast area’s of the world, in which the concept of the
        American Revolution and the principals of our dear Founding
        Fathers, will never be incorporated nor even considered.

        There are lands whom soil is not conductive to any grow, irrespective of effort: There
        are lands with productive soil but the seeds are mismanaged, year in year out.

        Simply put, Mr Barris, because a concept works does not mean
        it is applicable to all situations.

        Thank you for another one of your articles and your lively debate!

        You are an excellent asset to this website!!

  • Roger Barris:

    Dear JG III:

    Personally, I am not a fan of any religion, but I recognize that some are worse than others and Islam is definitely on the “worse” end of the spectrum.

    Even if you hold this opinion, though, the “nation-building” plans of McCain and Graham make no sense. If the religion is irredeemable, then there are only two logical responses: revert to the Middle Age practice of severely restricting interactions with the Muslim world (ie., only allow trade through designated “trade cities” such as Venice and Dubrovnik were during the Middle Ages) or commence of war of extinction. The intermediate path proposed by the nation builders (which would also have to be, if you hold this view, religion builders or re-builders) is the worse possible response. Even exposure to catch the disease but not a tough enough response to eradicate it.

    • John Galt III:

      Roger,

      National building works if your military crushes the country like Germany and then you outlaw the National Socialist German Workers Party or in this case, Islam. That won’t work with 56 or 57 Muslims nations. Islam is at war with the world. That is the point of Mohammed, the Koran, The Hadith and “The Reliance of the Traveler”.

      A few trading entrepots is not going to work. Lee Kuan Yew, the founder of modern Singapore understood that he had one problem subgroup – his Muslims, and he threw up his hands. He also said Islam would be a problem for decades all over the world.

      The other issue is the left’s love affair with Islam. They know a reliable voting bloc when they see one. the left and the Muslims have a common enemy: Western Civilization and all it stands for (Rule of Law, property rights, free markets, civil liberties and so forth). Hollande got 93% of the Muslim vote. Without it, he would have lost. The eloi nations of Western Europe are committing cultural suicide. Obama, Clinton and the Democrats want the same here. These current leftist parties are profoundly secular, hate the Judeo-Christian heritage but have no problem with Islam. Why do think that is? It is obvious.

      So it comes down to a war with Islam externally and internally. The allies of the Muslims are the cultural/economic Marxists (Post Modernist, anti-Western, however you wish to describe them). These allies are in all western countries with the exception of the Eastern European countries that understand what is like to live under The Nazis first and the Communist second. They don’t want a third evil ruler.

      So, when your enemy has sworn to kill or enslave you, you two choices – surrender or fight. Western Europe is surrendering.

  • John Galt III:

    The Islamic State is not the problem. Iran is not the problem. Saudi Arabia and Syria are not the problem. The problem is a 1,400 organized crime syndicate that is also a religious cult. It is Islam. It is utterly unchanged in 1,400 years and if you want to know what life was like in the Middle East and the entire Mediterranean in the 8th and 7th Centuries just focus on the actions of the Islamic State.

    The politicians of the Occident just tiptoe around it by saying 1) Actions of lone wolves 2) The recent atrocity has nothing to do with Islam 3) The perpetrators of the recent atrocity are perverting a great religion 4) Islam is a religion of peace 5) the future does not belong to those who insult the prophet or Islam 6) The root cause is poverty and list is endless and also a total lie and obfuscation.

    Islam for 1,400 years offers non-believers three choices: 1) Convert 2) Be treated as a dhimmi (slave) or 3) fight Islam until it is destroyed.

Your comment:

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Most read in the last 20 days:

  • French labour union workers and students attend a demonstration against the French labour law proposal in Marseille, France, as part of a nationwide labor reform protests and strikes, March 31, 2016. REUTERS/Jean-Paul Pelissier/File PhotoHow the Welfare State Dies
      Hollande Threatens to Ban Protests Brexit has diverted attention from another little drama playing out in Europe. As of the time of writing, if you Google “Hollande threatens to ban protests” or variations thereof, you will find Russian, South African and even Iranian press reports on the topic. Otherwise, it's basically crickets (sole exception: Politico).  Gee, we wonder why?   They don't like him anymore: 120.000 protesters recently turned Paris into a war zone. All...
  • The-answer-is-yesToward Freedom: Will The UK Write History?
      Mutating Promises We are less than one week away from the EU referendum, the moment when the British people will be called upon to make a historic decision – will they vote to “Brexit” or to “Bremain”? Both camps have been going at each other with fierce campaigns to tilt the vote in their direction, but according to the latest polls, with the “Leave” camp’s latest surge still within the margin of error, the outcome is too close to call.   The battle lines are...
  • water houseA Market Ready to Blow and the Flag of the Conquerors
      Bold Prediction MICHAELS, Maryland – The flag in front of our hotel flies at half-mast. The little town of St. Michaels is a tourist and conference destination on the Chesapeake Bay. It is far from Orlando, and even farther from Daesh (a.k.a. ISIL) and the Mideast.   St. Michaels, Maryland – the town that fooled the British (they say, today). Photo credit: Fletcher6   Out on the river, a sleek sailboat, with lacquered wood trim, glides by, making hardly a...
  • nails-in-a-bed-of-nails-new-yorker-cartoonGoing... Going... Gone! The EU Begins to Splinter
      Dark Social Mood Tsunami Washes Ashore Early this morning one might have been forgiven for thinking that Japan had probably just been hit by another tsunami. The Nikkei was down 1,300 points, the yen briefly soared above par. Gold had intermittently gained 100 smackers – if memory serves, the biggest nominal intra-day gain ever recorded (with the possible exception of one or two days in early 1980). Here is a picture of Haruhiko Kuroda in front of his Bloomberg monitor this...
  • queen_gold-840x501Rule Britannia
      A Glorious Day What a glorious day for Britain and anyone among you who continues to believe in the ideas of liberty, freedom, and sovereign democratic rule. The British people have cast their vote and I have never ever felt so relieved about having been wrong. Against all expectations, the leave camp somehow managed to push the referendum across the center line, with 51.9% of voters counted electing to leave the European Union.   Waving good-bye to...
  • junkThe Problem with Corporate Debt
      Taking Off Like a Rocket There are actually two problems with corporate debt. One is that there is too much of it... the other is that a lot of it appears to be going sour.   Harvey had a good time in recent years...well, not so much between mid 2014 and early 2016, but happy days are here again! Cartoon by Frank Modell   As a brief report at Marketwatch last week (widely ignored as far as we are aware) informs us:   “Businesses racked up debt in the...
  • deflated-souffleThe Fed’s  Doomsday Device
      Bezzle BALTIMORE –  Barron’s, in a lather, says the market is facing the “Two Horsemen of the Apocalypse.” Huh?   Only two? There were four last time!   Supposedly, the so-called Brexit – the vote in Britain this Thursday on whether to leave or remain in the European Union (EU) – and uncertainty over where the Fed will take U.S. interest rates are cutting down stocks faster than a Z-turn mower. But Brexit is a side show. As our contacts in London...
  • rate_hike_cartoon_10.15.2015_largeJanet Yellen’s $200-Trillion Debt Problem
      Blame “Brexit” BALTIMORE – The U.S. stock market broke its losing streak on Thursday [and even more so on Monday, ed.]. After five straight losing sessions, the Dow eked out a 92-point gain. The financial media didn’t know what to say about it. So, we ended up with the typical inanities, myths, and claptrap.   “Investors” are pushing the DJIA back up again..apparently any excuse will do at the moment. The idea may backfire though, as exactly the same thing happened...
  • Brexit supporterGold and Brexit
      Going Up for the Wrong Reason Gold is soaring. It should—and a lot—but in my view not for the reason it is. Indeed gold is insurance for uncertain times, a time that Brexit seems to represent. But insurance is an administrative cost — one must minimize its use.   August gold contract, daily – gold has been strong of late, but this seems to be driven by “Brexit” fears - click to enlarge.   Moreover, insuring against Brexit might ironically be equivalent...
  • Incrementum signalIn Gold We Trust, 2016
      The 10th Anniversary Edition of the “In Gold We Trust” Report As every year at the end of June, our good friends Ronald Stoeferle and Mark Valek, the managers of the Incrementum funds, have released the In Gold We Trust report, one of the most comprehensive and most widely read gold reports in the world. The report can be downloaded further below.   Gold, daily, over the past year - click to enlarge.   The report celebrates its 10th anniversary this year. As...
  • cameron at the EUBrexit Paranoia Creeps Into the Markets
      European Stocks Look Really Bad... Late last week stock markets around the world weakened and it seemed as though recent “Brexit” polls showing that the “leave” campaign has obtained a slight lead provided the trigger. The idea was supported by a notable surge in the British pound's volatility.   Battening down the hatches...   On the other hand, if one looks at European stocks, one could just as well argue that their bearish trend is simply continuing – and...
  • 7-bongo-bongo1Claudio Grass Talks to Godfrey Bloom
      Introductory Remarks – About Godfrey Bloom [ed note by PT: Readers may recall our previous presentation of “Godfrey Bloom the Anti-Politician”, which inter alia contains a selection of videos of speeches he gave in the European parliament. Both erudite and entertaining, Mr. Bloom constantly kept the etatistes of the EU on their toes.]   Godfrey Bloom, back in his days as UKIP whip Photo credit: Reuters   Before becoming a politician, Godfrey Bloom worked for 35 years...

Austrian Theory and Investment

Support Acting Man

Own physical gold and silver outside a bank

Archive

j9TJzzN

350x200

Realtime Charts

 

Gold in USD:

[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]

 


 

Gold in EUR:

[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]

 


 

Silver in USD:

[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]

 


 

Platinum in USD:

[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]

 


 

USD - Index:

[Most Recent USD from www.kitco.com]

 

THE GOLD CARTEL: Government Intervention on Gold, the Mega Bubble in Paper and What This Means for Your Future

 
Buy Silver Now!
 
Buy Gold Now!
 

Oilprice.com