Another 9/11? – My Thoughts on ISIS and America.


On The Daily Caller, we read:

An intelligence official warned Thursday that the terrorist group the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria “sees conflict with the U.S. as inevitable,” The Washington Post’s David Ignatius reported in his latest column.

The columnist, known for his extensive sourcing in the intelligence community, summarized an intelligence briefing he attended:

In a briefing for journalists Thursday, a panel of five U.S. intelligence officials summed up their assessment of an organization that has shown a remarkable durability because it is “patient,” “well-organized,” “opportunistic” and “flexible.” Under the leadership of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the group has rebounded from about 1,500 fighters in 2010 to more than 10,000 today — becoming a global jihadist organization that communicates in many languages. 

…Beyond the current conflict between ISIS and the American military in Iraq, members of the terror group have repeatedly threatened to attack the United States. VICE Media’s Medyan Dairieh recently spent three weeks in the ISIS-controlled Syrian city of Raqqa, which the terror group has proclaimed the capital of its newly declared Islamic caliphate. In his interviews with ISIS members, they warned about future attacks against the U.S.

“I say to America that the Islamic Caliphate has been established,” Abu Mosa, a spokesman for ISIS, told VICE Media in one interview. “We will humiliate them everywhere, God willing, and we will raise the flag of Allah in the White House.”

I give out a laughing snort whenever I read that last part. That statement sure makes for dramatic effect; but does anyone actually believe that will happen? Anybody who lives in fear of an ISIS-led Islamic wave conquering the USA is wasting their own brainpower even thinking about it.

Apparently, ISIS has made promises to assault the USA with terrorist attacks. Will this happen? Will there be any attacks? Unfortunately, I can say “there might be”. From the news reports I’ve seen, the types of guys who have joined ISIS are clearly violent maniacs with zero regard for anything that approaches a respect for human life or dignity. I see no reason why one of the many psychopaths currently running around in Iraq might not be able to find his way into the USA to raise a little hell somewhere. Alternatively, some JiHobbyist in the US may be influenced into doing something under the ostensible notion of “fighting for the cause”. Think the Boston Marathon Bombings. Such an attack is far too random to effectively prevent. There is not a lot the US government can do to stop such a thing from happening.
Now, after that somewhat jarring monologue, I can also say this: I’m not sure what ISIS thinks it’ll accomplish long-term, but if ISIS leader Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi has any sort of long-term vision for ISIS, then it would behoove him to keep the foreign terrorism to a minimum. Al-Baghdadi is talking about spreading his revolution across the world, but so did Ayatollah Khomeini after the 1979 Iranian revolution; and we can see how well that’s panned out.
The reason Al-Qaeda is difficult to deal with is because they’re a stateless organization that spans multiple nations and societies. They can launch an attack somewhere, and it’s difficult for anyone to effectively strike back. ISIS does not have this luxury. The reason for this lies in it’s very name: The Islamic State. If Al-Baghdadi decides to start sending out minions to raise hell elsewhere, such as in Europe or the USA, then he has to hope that it isn’t traced back to him. If it is, the response is simple: “Oh, this killer was sent by ISIS. Let’s reduce their capitol to rubble.” I’m not an enthusiastic supporter of war, but I’m no pacifist. If the genuinely justifiable moral provocation is there, I’m all for a defensive military strike. I’d have no qualms with sending a few bunker-busters Al-Baghdadi’s way to blow the guy into smithereens should he decide to begin “exporting the revolution”, if I may use that term.
I have no idea what exactly to predict from Al-Baghdadi and ISIS, but taking on the mantle of Statehood is like when Jaffar used his final wish to become a Genie. “ALL-MIGHTY COSMIC POWER!…. Itty bitty living space.” Cue golden bracers (which are apparently the sign of a Genie living in bondage). With ISIS taking on the mantle of statehood, they transition from becoming a stateless phantom, a la Al-Qaeda, to becoming a Sunni version of Iran, which is a serious downgrade. They can talk a big game, and maybe they even mean it, but there’s only so much that ISIS could accomplish in that vein before literally every nation in the world except maybe Saudi Arabia would gang up on them and leave nothing left of the Islamic State beyond a Wikipedia article. You want to know what kind of cause could bring Russia, China, and the USA together? ISIS would fill that role quite easily. I don’t know if that would actually solve the problem. But the threat is there. I’m sure Al-Baghdadi knows that, to some degree.
Al-Baghdadi has made calls for Muslim engineers and doctors to emigrate to the new Islamic State. Presumably, this means that he has some type of long-term vision for ISIS. Otherwise, why would it matter if they had any engineers, doctors or scientists? I presume Al-Baghdadi hopes to cultivate ISIS into a nation with staying power. Here’s the huge problem with that desire, which I haven’t heard anyone else articulate yet: ISIS will be assuredly a socialist nation. Socialist nations are permanently doomed to trend towards failure and breakdown. HUSH…. before you bring up the Nordic nations, which I have discussed before. The “Nordic Socialist” model continues to exist only because the Nordic nations are even more capitalistic and free-market oriented than the USA in a lot of ways. Insofar as the Nordic nations promote capitalism, they can sustain a socialist structure that is restricted to rotting slowly. Islamic socialism, however, is almost always virulently anti-free trade. I predict that ISIS would be nation of hardcore statism and bureaucracy. Couple that with an insane penchant for violence and instability, and you have what seems to me is a totally losing combination. Like I said, think “Sunni version of Iran”, but even more of a loser.
Conclusion: Terrorist attacks from ISIS against the USA are, unfortunately, a possibility. But this talk about “raising the flag of allah over the White House” is little more than a bad joke. ISIS and Al-Baghdadi talk a big game, but nationhood requires carrying a lot of baggage. If they go the full socialist route, which I am quite sure they will, then that baggage is doubled. If they think they can terrorize the world henceforth and forever, they’re in for a rude awakening, which I suspect Al-Baghdadi knows to at least some degree. Right now, they’re just milking the scare factor for all it’s worth.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

No comments yet.

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

%d bloggers like this: