Why are people taking Jordan's vow to 'destroy' ISIS seriously? Sure they can sort of go to war against them by stepping up sorties etc etc - but they're not sending troops into Iraq or Syria and therefore they're not gonna 'destroy' anything - the only way you get remotely close to a serious attack on ISIS is if you see a broad Sunni coalition ready to make actual war and not just spew angry rhetoric and even with that you'd still need to have Turkey at the head of such a thing since only they have the military assets required - and none of that is going to happen for a variety of reasons chief of which is this fantasy coalition goes nowhere without a strong American commitment backing up this would be 'war' and who believes for a second Obama would sign off on something like that? Such a commitment would mean American troops on the ground - it would mean making a decision on what to do about Assad - it would mean American troops taking the lead if [when] this Arab/Turkish amalgam falls apart - and it would mean a reoccupation of Sunni Iraq bringing you into direct conflict with Iran, which increasingly holds sway over Shia Iraq. Oh, and it would probably mean if you decide to dethrone Assad Hezbollah coming to his aid by launching an offensive on Israel which would to say the least stir the pot in ways that a reluctant warrior like Obama would have no ability or desire to deal with.
So what dream world are people living in that they take Jordan's rhetoric seriously? Hell, you could argue that ISIS committed the act of brutality for this precise reason - to lay bare divisions and make clear that there is no authority or power in the region willing or able to take them on. Jordan in a sense has thrown down a gauntlet that I doubt in the extreme can or will be backed up by significant action - which may have been exactly what ISIS was looking for. People are looking at the execution of the pilot as it were an act of senseless brutality - but much more likely is that there was a point to it - military history is full of such behavior and thinking - Genghis Khan committed atrocities with what seemed like a near reckless abandon, but in reality there was a purpose to it. Caesar as well amongst the Gauls. Napoleon in Russia - although that backfired - but one gets the point.
[Krauthammer makes my point but of course with a concise expertise that is beyond my humble efforts - but the crux of his point and mine is that those who look at ISIS and see nothing but a 'death cult' are making a big mistake - these guys may engage in barbaric acts, but they're strategic thinkers - and sad, hell pathetic as it is to acknowledge, their strategic thinking is much more coherent and reality based than Obama's - although as I've said before Obama indeed has a strategy, it's just not even remotely in touch with reality or coherence - it's the kind of 'strategic' thinking you'd hear tossed around the faculty lounge of an Ivy League school - sounds nifty, but then you leave the room and the harsh lights of the world turn it to dust]
So what dream world are people living in that they take Jordan's rhetoric seriously? Hell, you could argue that ISIS committed the act of brutality for this precise reason - to lay bare divisions and make clear that there is no authority or power in the region willing or able to take them on. Jordan in a sense has thrown down a gauntlet that I doubt in the extreme can or will be backed up by significant action - which may have been exactly what ISIS was looking for. People are looking at the execution of the pilot as it were an act of senseless brutality - but much more likely is that there was a point to it - military history is full of such behavior and thinking - Genghis Khan committed atrocities with what seemed like a near reckless abandon, but in reality there was a purpose to it. Caesar as well amongst the Gauls. Napoleon in Russia - although that backfired - but one gets the point.
[Krauthammer makes my point but of course with a concise expertise that is beyond my humble efforts - but the crux of his point and mine is that those who look at ISIS and see nothing but a 'death cult' are making a big mistake - these guys may engage in barbaric acts, but they're strategic thinkers - and sad, hell pathetic as it is to acknowledge, their strategic thinking is much more coherent and reality based than Obama's - although as I've said before Obama indeed has a strategy, it's just not even remotely in touch with reality or coherence - it's the kind of 'strategic' thinking you'd hear tossed around the faculty lounge of an Ivy League school - sounds nifty, but then you leave the room and the harsh lights of the world turn it to dust]
