Now it looks like a big win for ISIS, but what can President Trump do after the U.S. pull-out from Northeast Syria? The loss of intel on the ground from our abandoned Kurdish allies, the release/escape of terrorist prisoners, and the perception of U.S. apathy, creates conditions for an Islamic State revival. Is there a U.S. position somewhere between warmongering and isolationism? Bill Whittle argues that terrorist movements require us to periodically “mow the grass,” but we have ways of doing that without U.S. boots on the ground. Can ISIS be remote controlled?
Binge-watch the full archive of Bill Whittle Now with Scott Ott.
Unlock new levels of engagement by becoming a Member.
10 replies on “Big Win for ISIS: What Trump Can Do After U.S. Pull-Out from Northeast Syria”
The enemy of my enemy is not always my friend. When ISIS was defeated two problems were created. Both 100% predictable.
Kurdish communist allies that began killing off any non communist allies both Kurd’s and non Kurd’s.
And a large number of fanatical brainwashed ISIS civilians: older men, wounded men, women and children that could not be reformed or killed off.
When we beat the fascists we beat the ideology and killed or jailed the leadership. But Islams ideology is in a book. Its leadership is fluid rarely centralised. Any man can be an Imam and a warlord.
100% predictable but is it taught at West Point? It is taught at Duntroon. The Australian equivalent.
Would a school curriculum to properly teach this cycle and consequences that Bill speaks of significantly alter people’s lazy voting habits?
I am perfectly willing to leave them to their own devices with the caveat that they must remain in their own countries. The loss of life is quite sad, but I don’t think that it is our responsibility to stop them from killing each other. The moment that anyone wants to export a “join us or be killed” ideology to the USA, I am 100% in favor of stopping them by any means necessary.
I wonder if helping out a country like iraq to develop its infrastructure and economy and turn them into a powerful ally would be a better way to go about dealing with these extremists. our allies would have all the resources they needed to deal with these turds. peace through development so to speak.
Best I can tell is we will be fighting ISIS or “Radical Islam” for as long as the West is around. They will never be 100% defeated, only suppressed for a while at best.
These are “true believers” and it is most likely not in the nature of the West to really eliminate them. It would require behavior much like there own. Then would also be that nagging question of living with ourselves after if we did it.
Knowing there are 12000 ISIS fighters, who were days or months earlier were torturing, beheading, immolating, dismembering or otherwise brutally murdering civilians, now in prison in Syria who will soon be back on the battle field should tell us something.
I regret that I have but one up vote to give to this comment.
Who you gonna believe? The New York Times or Strategy Page. Checkout the latest Strategy Talk for a realistic analyst of the situation from Jim Dunnigan and Austin Bay.
I don’t know about Strategy Talk but the NYT would only tell the truth if they got drunk and accidentally fell into it.
If they won’t fight for their own freedom and lives, we have no responsibility to do it for them. Let them live or die by their own choices and actions.
The bottom line is there is no rational reason that it is our responsibility to protect ANY living being in the area. Our ONLY responsibility is to ourselves! As far as I am concerned, they can live in the hell they have created for themselves or be made to vanish from the earth.