Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 41

Planet Debate 2014

ISIL/Terrorism Update

Dont Cooperate With Syria ........................................................................................................................................ 2


Need Syrian Cooperation............................................................................................................................................ 3
" Terrorism is a Threat ................................................................................................................................................ 4
A2: No Al Qaeda Threat .............................................................................................................................................. 6
ISIS is a Threat............................................................................................................................................................. 7
ISIS A Threat CBW .................................................................................................................................................. 11
ISIS A Threat Iraq ................................................................................................................................................... 12
ISIS Threat - Genocide .............................................................................................................................................. 13
ISIS Not a Threat ....................................................................................................................................................... 14
Military Attacks on ISIS Wont Stop Terrorism ......................................................................................................... 19
Military Attack on ISIS Good ..................................................................................................................................... 20
Should Strike in Syria ................................................................................................................................................ 22
Should Not Strike in Syria ......................................................................................................................................... 23
Should Strike ISIS ...................................................................................................................................................... 26
Air Strikes Alone Wont Solve ISIS in Syria ................................................................................................................ 27
International Coalition Needed ................................................................................................................................ 28
US Leadership Necessary to Build an International Coalition .................................................................................. 32
A2: A Political Resolution Will Save Iraq ................................................................................................................... 35
US Leadership Good -- Terrorism ............................................................................................................................. 38
Proposals to Fight ISIS in IRaq................................................................................................................................... 39

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

Dont Cooperate With Syria


Asad hasnt fought ISIS and even buys oil from them
Adam Taylor, Washington Post Blogs, August 27, 2014, The Islamic State or Assad? Isn't there another choice?;
Looking for the 'good guy' in the Syrian fight.
Shahbandar sees intervention with Assad as absurd. "Assad was a key ingredient in the rise of the Islamic State," he
says. "He and his regime turned Syria into a launching pad for terrorism over the years and fostered the
environment in which transnational terrorist forces grew in the country." The argument is persuasive. Writing for
the New York Times, Syrian journalist Hassan Hassan points out that the Syrian state didn't attack Islamic State-held
cities with the same intensity saved for other rebel cities, and that the regime has bought oil from the group.
Assad's decision to avoid fighting the group may have been driven by a desire for it to overtake the more secular
groups, such as the Free Syrian Army, that were more palatable to the west.

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

Need Syrian Cooperation


Syrian cooperation critical for strikes
Adam Taylor, Washington Post Blogs, August 27, 2014, The Islamic State or Assad? Isn't there another choice?;
Looking for the 'good guy' in the Syrian fight.

Right now, however, its not clear exactly how plausible U.S. strikes against Islamic State within Syria would be
without some kind of approval, tacit or otherwise, from Assad. The Syrian government has warned that unilateral
strikes against Islamic State on Syrian soil would be seen as an act of "aggression," though it has indicated it is open to
some kind of cooperation. Assad's regime has anti-aircraft capabilities and an air force which could be used to
hinder any U.S. intelligence gathering or strikes in Syria. Another factor is Russia, a prominent supporter of the
Assad regime, which has also voiced criticism.
Joshua Landis, director of Center for Middle East Studies at the University of Oklahoma, argues that a key problem is
that the more secular rebel groups don't have the support they would need to actually control Syria.

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

" Terrorism is a Threat


ISIL and other terror groups present and imminent threat to the US
Bluefield Daily Telegraph (West Virginia), August 26, 2014, President

needs to acknowledge the war

on terror is not finished


Early in 2012, a State Department official commented that the war on terror was over, and about a year later
President Barack Obama repeated that idea.
With that declaration began an active effort to cleanse the national dialog of the idea of Islamic terrorism and the use
of any words used to describe it. The term "War on Terror" was replaced with the euphemism "Overseas Contingency
Operations," and the murder of 13 people at Fort Hood by a Muslim U.S. Army doctor was termed "workplace
violence."
Since terrorism was no longer a threat, Mr. Obama removed our troops from Iraq, and reiterated his pledge to close
our terrorist detainment facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and do something with the accused terrorists being held
there. In fact, five of them were traded not long ago for the suspected Army deserter Bowe Bergdahl.
But now reality again rears its ugly head. ISIS or ISIL, Hamas, Boko Haram, Al-Qaeda, Ansar al-Islam ... names that
are synonymous with brutality, mayhem and murder, are prominent in the news, and we frequently hear about
cutting off fingers and hands, and mercy killings of people for their crimes, or beheadings and mass executions for
the indiscretion of not believing as the members of these organizations insist that you must believe.
Recent events in the Middle East and Africa have shown the brutal, uncivilized acts committed by the savages in these
organizations more frequently than ever before. The war on Christians and against Israel reached levels that broke
through the administration's well-developed immunity against the reality of Islamic atrocities and terrorism, and has
refocused their attention on it again, at last.
Hamas dug tunnels from Gaza into Israel to murder Israelis with rocket-propelled grenades, it fires rockets
deliberately aimed at civilian areas and protects its rockets by hiding them in schools and other public structures,
resulting in the deaths of more than a thousand Palestinians when Israel targets places from which attacks have been
launched. USA Today reported that Hamas firing squads publicly executed 18 Gaza Palestinians suspected of
collaborating with Israel. Later, gunmen in black Hamas garb lined up seven hooded men and shot them dead as
hundreds watched.
"Northern Nigeria's riot police training academy has been overrun by Boko Haram Islamist militants," a witness in
Borno state told the BBC. "Boko Haram is blamed for the killing of more than 10,000 people since the start of its
militant Islamist offensive in 2009 across northeastern Nigeria," said the Daily Kos online.
CNN reports that in the areas of Syria "controlled by ISIS, public floggings and executions have become commonplace.
Most recently ISIS has battled other opposition groups in fighting that has left well more than 2,000 people dead."
"The militant Sunni group ISIS has said it is establishing a caliphate, or Islamic state, in the territories it controls in
Iraq and Syria. It also proclaimed the group's leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, as caliph and 'leader for Muslims
everywhere,'" according to the UK Guardian online.
But Iraq, Israel, Syria and Nigeria have no patent on this savagery, and our essentially non-existent southern border is
an invitation for that evil to enter the U.S. Some Islamists probably have "sneaked in" legally through airports.
Members of ISIS/ISIR in Iraq have said they will raise their black flag over the White House. People in the know in
the United States believe this threat is not an idle one, and that we must take action to prevent attack from within.
This threat highlights the absolute idiocy, recklessness and irresponsibility of the Obama administration's "hands-off"
policy on the southern border, and means our government has no idea who is coming across the border or how many
Islamic terrorists are here already.
Oklahoma Republican Sen. Jim Inhofe, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, told an Oklahoma
TV station that ISIS has now set its sights on Americans and targets on U.S. soil. The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff, Gen. Martin Dempsey, told a Pentagon press briefing that "because of open borders and immigration issues,"
ISIS/ISIL is an "immediate threat." "We're in the most dangerous position we've ever been in as a nation," he said.
A former CIA officer told CNN that ISIS is already on this side of the Atlantic. "I have been told with no uncertainty
there are ISIS sleeper cells in this country," Bob Baer said. While CNN reported that two U.S. officials had refuted his

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

claim, the network said the officials are worried that ISIS militants with passports might travel to the U.S. to launch
attacks on American soil.

Global terror threat


Monterey County Herald, 8-19 (California), August 19, 2014 Editorial: Panetta: No time for isolationism
But, terrorism has "metastasized" into the newest threats, including ISIS, which wants to establish an Islamic
caliphate as a staging ground for future attacks on the U.S., said Panetta. The militants were aided by sectarianism in
Iraq promoted in part by former Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. Panetta He said he supports Obama's decision to
start air strikes in northern Iraq against ISIS. Contrary to reports, he noted, the U.S. has reintroduced "boots on the
ground" in Iraq special forces working with Iraqi and Kurdish forces. Unfortunately, ISIS is only one of several
growing terrorist threats in the world, said Panetta, noting threats in Yemen, Somalia and Nigeria.
3. Panetta also looked at the rogue state of North Korea and it's potential threat of mobile ICBMs aimed at U.S.
territory; the continuing concerns Iran will be able to produce nuclear weapons; the chaos and carnage in Syria; the
threats to Israel from Hamas and Hezbollah; and Russia's moves to regain prevailing influence over countries formerly
in the Soviet orbit. Panetta said it's a "very real possibility" Russia will send troops into the Ukraine and that Soviet
strongman Vladimir Putin is "somebody you have to deal with through strength."
As if all this wasn't scary enough, Panetta then noted the attempts to assault U.S. security through cyber terrorism,
with the potential that America's electrical grid, transportation networks and financial systems could be brought
down.
The United States can hardly withdraw from such a toxic storm. Panetta is right that no other country has the will or
the way to fight back. Isolationism won't provide anything but a false sense of security that inevitably will be
shattered.

Terrorists flocking to safe havens in Iraq and Syria


Senator Inhofe, Targeted News Service, August 23, 2014 Saturday 10:43 PM EST , Oklahoma GOP: Inhofe Statement
on Threat of ISIS
The Oklahoma Republican Party issued the following news release:
U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC), today released the
following statement on the growing threat of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, the terrorist group commonly known
as ISIS:
"The President's inaction over the last three years has allowed the rapid growth of ISIS, potentially the greatest
terrorist threat to American citizens. Thousands of hardened fighters, including ever increasing numbers of foreign
fighters with Western passports, are flocking to terrorist safe havens in Iraq and Syria and will return better trained,
battle hardened, and internationally networked to spread terror in their home countries.
"ISIS enjoys safe haven and acts with relative impunity in large swaths of Iraq and Syria. President Obama's failure to
acknowledge the reality of the threat has and will continue to endanger American lives. In the absence of a coherent
plan to deal with ISIS and meaningful U.S. assistance, the direct threat to the homeland and American citizens will
grow, and the likelihood is more Americans will be savagely killed. The vicious cold-blooded murder of American
James Foley is deplorable and heartbreaking. My thoughts and prayers are with his family and the families of the
hostages still being held.
"The President's limited strikes in Iraq have not halted ISIS momentum - only temporarily redirected it. Until
President Obama articulates and implements a comprehensive strategy against ISIS across Iraq and Syria, we will
continue to see more savage executions, more killing of religious minorities, more humanitarian disasters like Mt.
Sinjar, and more enslavement and abuse of women and girls. Obama talks a big game but his actions tell a different
story. ISIS has shown they're serious about killing Americans. We need to show we're serious about protecting them."

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

A2: No Al Qaeda Threat


Al Qaeda threat has morphed into threats from other groups
RTT News (United States), August 22, 2014, Al Qaeda Threat Has Changed And Morphed, Mainly As ISIS: US Military
Chief
LENGTH: 393 words
(RTTNews) - The threat from Al Qaeda has changed and morphed into a number of loosely connected terror groups,
according to the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff.
The threat from ISIS is a serious representation of the threat from terror groups, Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey said
during a Pentagon news conference Thursday.
In the aftermath of 9/11, the United States focused on al-Qaida, and the nation made significant progress against the
group that killed 3,000 Americans that day.
But the threat has changed and morphed, said the chairman, noting the Arab Spring and the problems in Syria and
Iraq are part of this threat. In many places there is a lack of governance.
"We actually have groups that now kind of are loosely connected, in some cases affiliated, that run from
Afghanistan across the Arabian Peninsula into Yemen to the Horn of Africa and into North and West Africa,"
Dempsey said.
Some of those groups are local, some are regional, and some are global threats and that means it is "going to be a very
long contest," he told reporters.
"It's ideological. It's not political. It's religious, in many cases," the chairman added.
Dempsey said the ISIL terror group, which he prefers to call ISIS, has an "apocalyptic, end-of-days" vision that will
eventually have to be defeated.
The United States must take the leadership role in this long contest, Dempsey said.

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

ISIS is a Threat
ISIS has a 30,000 person army and a billion dollars in cash
The Cincinnati Enquirer (Ohio), August 26, 2014 , US must present united front on ISIS, p. A7, FredKundrata, Retired
Air Force Lt. Col. Fred Kundrata is the Democratic nominee for Congress in Ohio's 1st District.

Having served in the Air Force for 28 years, including combat time in the Persian Gulf War, I know that decisions to
pursue military action should never be taken lightly. But ISIS presents a new kind of threat, a terrorist army with
more than 10,000 fighters, American-made weapons and billions in cash.
The United States must present a united front to the world on this critical national security issue.
Congress should put partisanship aside and pass a resolution that gives President Barack Obama the authority he
needs to take on ISIS.
In addition, Congress should fast-track funding for Kurdish and moderate Syrian forces, as requested by Defense
Secretary Chuck Hagel, that won't be available until Oct. 1. With the backing of Congress, the president will have clear
authority to expand the mission, within defined parameters, and pursue the objective of destroying ISIS wherever it
exists.

ISIS aligning with Al Qaeda


John Hayward, August 25, 2014, Human Events Online,
How much of a threat is ISIS to the West?
McCaul noted that ISIS recently announced a new partnership with the branch of al-Qaeda that haunts Yemen,
giving them access to "the premier al-Qaeda bomb maker," and it's got a massive number of foreign fighters with
international travel papers ready to deploy. The Islamic State is also very aggressive at using social media to gather
recruits, not all of which have climbed onto airplanes and headed to Caliphate HQ. McCaul said that some general
"be on the lookout" advisories have been issued from the Department of Homeland Security to local law enforcement
in the United States.The United Kingdom seems to have gone on elevated alert for homegrown terror operatives as
well. The prime suspect for the masked terrorist who appeared in the James Foley beheading video is none other
than Abdel-Majed Abdel Bary, a 23-year-old UK rap singer who gained international notoriety a few weeks ago by
posing for photos with a severed human head in Syria. ("Chillin with my other homie, or what's left of him," he
cheerfully captioned the photo.)As the UK Daily Mail reports, Bary's father, who he has praised in the rap music
that somehow didn't tip anyone off that he might be a budding terrorist himself, is currently working his way through
the American criminal justice system for his role in the 1998 Kenyan and Tanzanian embassy bombings. The elder
Bary also served as head of Islamic Jihad in London, appointed to the position by al-Qaeda honcho Ayman al-Zawahiri.
His duties included running what his UK indictments called "bin Laden's media information office," purchasing
terrorist equipment, and recruiting new members for the organization. The Brits are obviously worried about how
many of those recruits might still be hanging around London, awaiting orders.The list of other top suspects for "Jihad
John" related by the New York Post isn't exactly comforting evidence of British social unity:

ISIS a threat to the homeland


John Hayward, August 25, 2014, Human Events Online,
How much of a threat is ISIS to the West?

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

A former CIA officer told radio host Laura Ingraham that ISIS and other terror groups have been reaching out to
Mexican cartels; the massive new terror state in Iraq has plenty of money to pay for the smuggling services of topshelf coyotes. Former CIA director Mike Morell noted last week that it wouldn't take a lot of sophisticated
equipment for terrorist operatives to rack up an impressive body count in urban or suburban America: "If an ISIS
member showed up at a mall in the United States tomorrow with an AK-47 and killed a number of Americans, I would
not be surprised."
Morale and willpower are the alpha and omega of war. ISIS claims the balance of morale is on its side, and it can
show its devotees plenty of evidence to back up that claim, including dim-witted editorials in major American
newspapers lecturing the Western world on the "moral hazard" of referring to ISIS as "evil," because George Bush
created them by calling them nasty names. When a terrorist reads crap like this, he's got every reason to think a
good massacre in suburbia is all it will take to bring a significant fraction of the American liberal establishment to its
knees, sobbing Bush's name and gargling about "outreach" while they staple white handkerchiefs to pool cues. Also,
since ISIS thrives on its barbaric prestige, it has defensive reasons to pull off some kind of atrocity on 9/11; it will
appear weakened to its followers if it doesn't prove it can draw blood from the West. The occasional murder of a
Western hostage won't be good enough to keep those fires of jihad burning.
With all of that in mind - aggressive recruiting by ISIS with a track record of success in Western nations, adept
use of social media, weak American border security, plenty of soft targets to exploit, plus a weak and confused
White House headed by a disconnected President and the anniversary of 9/11 hard upon us - which of the threat
assessments I mentioned at the beginning of this article sounds more plausible

ISIS creating a terrorist safe haven in Iraq and Syria


Bartlesville Examiner-Enterprise (Oklahoma), August 24, 2014
Inhofe warns of ISIS growth, criticizes Obama's handling of 'greatest terrorist threat' to US
WASHINGTON - U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, warned this
week that the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria - the terrorist group known as ISIS - has set its sights on Americans and
targets on U.S. soil, as he criticized President Barack Obama's handling of the "greatest terrorist threat" to the U.S.
His comments came after militants posted a video this week showing the execution of American journalist James
Foley.
"The president's inaction over the last three years has allowed the rapid growth of ISIS, potentially the greatest
terrorist threat to American citizens," Inhofe said in a statement released on Saturday. "Thousands of hardened
fighters, including ever increasing numbers of foreign fighters with Western passports, are flocking to terrorist safe
havens in Iraq and Syria and will return better trained, battle hardened, and internationally networked to spread
terror in their home countries."
Inhofe, who also spoke earlier this week about his concerns with the growing terror organization, urged Obama to
implement a more aggressive strategy.
"In the absence of a coherent plan to deal with ISIS and meaningful U.S. assistance, the direct threat to the homeland
and American citizens will grow, and the likelihood is more Americans will be savagely killed," Inhofe said.
Inhofe noted that Obama's "limited" strikes in Iraq have failed to halt the momentum of ISIS, instead only
"temporarily" redirecting it.
"Obama talks a big game but his actions tell a different story," Inhofe said. "ISIS has shown they're serious about
killing Americans. We need to show we're serious about protecting them."

ISIS a global terror threat


James Robbins, 8-10, Daily Record (Morristown, New Jersey), Terror threat continues with ISIS, p. 5 James S. Robbins,
author of "The Real Custer: From Boy General to Tragic Hero," is a member of USA TODAY's Board of Contributors.

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

Last January, President Obama dismissed the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) as a mere junior varsity terrorist
outfit compared to al-Qaeda. "The analogy we use around here sometimes, and I think is accurate," he told the New
Yorker, "is if a jayvee team puts on Lakers uniforms that doesn't make them Kobe Bryant."
Flash forward to this summer. Islamist radicals control vast swaths of land across Iraq and Syria, and this week
crossed the border into Lebanon.
Their victims' heads festoon telephone wires in Raqqa, Syria, and they have posted videos online showing mass
executions of prostrate Iraqis.
Other terror groups are rallying to their black banner. ISIS has been so successful that at the end of June it shortened
its name to simply the Islamic State (IS), with its leader Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi assuming the title of caliph. President
Obama may think they are JV, but they clearly see themselves as big league.
The Islamic State is metastasizing much the same way al-Qaeda did, but on an accelerated timeline.
Osama bin Laden's network grew in the 1990s by recruiting foreign fighters who had battled the Red Army in
Afghanistan in the 1980s.
The Islamic State has developed its own deep bench of transnational terror talent, recruiting from countries
throughout the Middle East, Europe, and even the United States.
Franchises are reportedly opening in Libya and Tunisia. The North African terror conglomerate Al-Qaeda in the
Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) has aligned with IS.
Nigerian Boko Haram leader Abu Bakar Shekau has sworn allegiance to Abu Bakr, as has Abu Sayaaf leader Isnilon
Hapilon in the Philippines.
The Islamic State currently controls more fighters, more territory, and has a vaster alliance system than al-Qaeda
ever did.
Like bin Laden, Abu Bakr is exploiting the breakdown in state sovereignty and seizing control of ungoverned spaces.
The problem of governance is even worse today than it was in the 1990s, though the White House seems unaware.
In June, Obama declared that "the world is less violent than it has ever been," and in July, White House press secretary
Josh Earnest boasted of the administration's role in increasing the "tranquility of the global community."
Mr. Obama's perspective is that America is winning the war on terrorism because Osama bin Laden is dead and U.S.
drones continue to decimate "core al-Qaeda."
However, this perspective is dangerously outdated.
The war on terrorism has always been less a battle against a specific terror organization than a struggle against a
violent, transnational extremist ideology.
Al-Qaeda is no longer the leading force in global Islamist terrorism; the torch has passed to the Islamic State, which
we ignore at our peril.
In his first public statement as caliph, Abu Bakr proclaimed that the world is divided into two camps, the "camp of
Islam and faith" and the "camp of the Jews, the crusaders, (and) their allies," led by the United States.
And like bin Laden, he has a vision.

No plot to attack the US


Jay Newton Small, 8-25, White House: ISIS Not Planning to Attack the U.S. Homeland Yet,
http://time.com/3176754/isis-isil-syria-homeland-attack/
Hundreds of Westerners are joining the fight in Iraq and Syria, but the U.S. has found no evidence of a plot against
the homeland over SIS The U.S. government has no evidence of a current plot by fighters for the Islamic State of Iraq
and Greater Syria (ISIS) to attack the U.S. homeland, White House press secretary Josh Earnest said Monday. We are
concerned about the threat that is posed by [ISIS], but it is the assessment, as stated by the Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, by the intelligence community, that there currently is not an active plot under way to attack the U.S.
homeland, Earnest told reporters.

ISIS a greater threat than Saddam and Al Qaeda combined


Guardian, 8-22, 14, http://guardianlv.com/2014/08/isis-threat-to-turkey-saudi-arabia-andjordan/#gpUBPhJ8xi4MMBZq.99

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

10

With ISIS now controlling significant portions of Iraq and Syria, the U.S. faces a threat potentially more grave than
Saddam and al-Qaeda combined. Because ISIS is a Sunni organization fighting against Shiite governments in Syria
and Iraq, the governments of Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Jordan have been largely silent even though ISIS represents
a threat to their economies as well as their respective regimes. For Turkey, the ISIS fight against the Kurds
conveniently limits the capabilities of a regional nemesis. Nevertheless, the ISIS threat could soon hurt Turkish
commerce routes as well as tourism revenues. The threats to the monarchies of Jordan and Saudi Arabia are more
direct. Any Sunni movement creating street unrest creates pressures on the viability of monarchies forged on the
implied consent of the populace. Much of the financial support for ISIS comes from individuals in Jordan, Saudi
Arabia and Kuwait. The Kuwait banking system is a sieve that funnels funds to the organization. Again, along the
theme of unintended consequences, U.S. forces tossed Saddam out of Kuwait, yet a significant portion of the
monetary lifeblood for ISIS comes from or flows through Kuwait. According to reports, the U.S. government is
working with Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait to slow down or stop the flow of funds, but the task is difficult.

11

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

ISIS A Threat CBW


ISIS terrorists developing chemical and biological weapons capability
James Kittfield, 8-20, The National Journal, August 20, 2014 Why Washington Should Declare War on ISIS
A congressional authorization targeting ISIS, however limited in time or geography, would go a long way toward
clarifying for the American people this growing threat to their security. In a recent exclusive interview, Lt. Gen.
Michael Flynn, the outgoing director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, told me that Islamic extremist groups that
have adopted al-Qaida's nihilistic ideology are stronger and more threatening today than before 9/11.
"I know that's a scary thought, but in 2004, there were 21 total Islamic terrorist groups spread out in 18 countries.
Today, there are 41 Islamic terrorist groups spread out in 24 countries," said Flynn. "A lot of these groups have the
intention to attack Western interests, to include Western embassies and in some cases Western countries. Some
have both the intention and some capability to attack the United States homeland. For instance, we're doing all we
can to understand the outflow of foreign fighters from Syria and Iraq, many of them with Western passports, because
another threat I've warned about is Islamic terrorists in Syria acquiring chemical or biological weapons. We know
they are trying to get their hands on chemical weapons and use what they already have to create a chemical
weapons capability."

12

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

ISIS A Threat Iraq


ISIS threat growing in Iraq strategic gains and ethnic cleansing
Anthony H. Cordesman, 8-4, 14 holds the Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy at the Center for Strategic and
International Studies in Washington, D.C, Iraq: A Time to Act, http://csis.org/publication/iraq-time-act DOA 8-27, 14
It has been more than a month since that options study was completed, however, and the Islamic State has so far
gained steadily each week in which the United States has failed to act. It continues to score gains in the area around
Baghdad. It has won significant battles with the Pesh Merga, in part because of a lack of financial and military support
from the Maliki government. It has built up a growing threat to key elements of Iraqs infrastructure and created
major new economic pressures on the Iraqis in Shiite and Kurdish areas by disrupting trade and exports from Turkey.
The Islamic State is also triggering massive internal displacements of more than 1 million Iraqis out of a population of
some 33 million and creating a revival of Shiite militias and pressures on Arab Sunnis that threaten to further divide
the country and create more internal refugees. It has also carried out at least some mass killings of Shiites,
Turkomans, and Yazdis as well as the ethnic cleansing of Christian minorities.

13

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

ISIS Threat - Genocide


ISIS committing genocide
Jerusalem Post, August 11, 2014, For Gaza critics, lessons from ISIS on genocide. Can we expect mass protests in
Vienna, Paris and Berlin calling for the protection of the oppressed of Iraq? Misrepresenting genocide does an injustice
to all of its true victims, 9

WASHINGTON - Protesters against Israel's operation in Gaza should pay close attention to what is happening in
northern Iraq. From a mountaintop, with a view over enemy combatants from a clear moral high ground, the United
States is acting against the pending threat of actual genocide: the intentional, regime-sponsored systematic
extermination of a people based on their identity.
Genocide is not a word often uttered by American presidents. In part, that is because genocide is an exceptionally rare
crime. But when the act occurs, it is unmistakable in its scale and its hallmarks: the world knows what has happened,
because historically, its perpetrators hold a worldview that their murderous actions were justified.
In that tradition, the medieval Islamic State, or ISIS, has made no secret of its goal to rule a caliphate full of zealot
Sunnis, where women are enslaved and mutilated, and nonbelievers are tortured and beheaded. Tens of thousands
of innocents have run for their lives from its warpath without much help from the international community - until
now, from the United States, which has committed its military to the enforcement of the norm codified by the Geneva
Conventions, against tolerating genocide.
Can we expect mass protests in Vienna, Paris and Berlin calling for the protection of the oppressed of Iraq? The United
Nations High Commissioner for Refugees says over 1 million have been displaced across Iraqi territory in the last
month alone, with over 100,000 Christians, Yazidis and many Muslims now seeking shelter.
This is what the threat of genocide looks like, for all those confused by its definition. Yazidi children are dying of
thirst on the peak of a low mountain, without roofs over their heads to protect them from the August Iraqi sun, in
flight from their homes because ISIS believes their families should submit and convert or perish. ISIS wants these
people dead at their hands; the acute travesty unfolding in Iraq is just that simple.
International norms require that the world make every effort to protect these innocent people stranded on Mount
Sinjar, regardless of their religion, creed or ethnicity. Thankfully, due to the hard-fought successes of liberal
democracies, that standard applies to all peoples, everywhere, including the Jews of Israel and of the Diaspora, and
the desperate Palestinians of Gaza.
Unfortunately for Gazans, they are ruled by a government that, like ISIS, makes no secret of its intention to kill,
systematically, on a massive scale.
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH

14

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

ISIS Not a Threat


ISIS has no relative military power and no allies
Patrick Buchanan, August 26, 2014 To Defeat the Islamic State, Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of the new book "The
Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to Create the New Majority."

Undeniably, these are bloodthirsty religious fanatics who revel in beheadings and crucifixions and have exhibited
battlefield bravery and skill.
But are 17,000 jihadi fighters in landlocked regions of Iraq and Syria really an imminent and mortal threat to an
America with thousands of nuclear weapons and tens of thousands of missiles and bombs and the means to deliver
them?
How grave is this crisis? Consider the correlation of forces.
Who are the vocal and visible friends and fighting allies of ISIS?
They are nonexistent.
The Turks, Saudis, Qataris and Kuwaitis who, stupidly, have been aiding ISIS in bringing down Bashar Assad and
blowing a hole in the "Shia Crescent" of Tehran, Baghdad, Damascus and Hezbollah, have lately awakened to their
idiocy and are cutting off aid to ISIS.
Moderate Sunnis detest ISIS for its barbarism and desecration of shrines. The Christians and Yazidis fear and loathe
them. The Kurds, both the Syrian YPG and PKK, which broke open the exit route for the Yazidis from Mount Sinjar, and
the peshmerga despise ISIS.
Lebanon's army, Syria's army, Hezbollah and Iran have been fighting ISIS with Russian assistance. Vladimir Putin
himself warned us of the absurdity of our attacking Assad last year, arguing that we would be allying ourselves with
the same terrorists who brought down the twin towers.

Was Putin not right?


Even al-Qaida and Hamas have repudiated ISIS.
To find out more about Patrick Buchanan and read features by other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit the
Creators Web page at www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2014 CREATORS.COM

ISIS not a threat to the US homeland


John Hayward, August 25, 2014, Human Events Online,
How much of a threat is ISIS to the West?
How much of a threat does ISIS pose to the Western world and the United States? They've murdered an American
hostage on video, delivering what amounts to a declaration of war, complete with promises of more American deaths
to come. But are they in a position to make good on that threat, with the anniversary of 9/11 only a few weeks
away?No, says the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as reported by Fox News:
Gen. Martin Dempsey, speaking to reporters on board a military plane traveling to Afghanistan, said Sunday that
he believes the Sunni insurgent group formerly known as ISIS is more of a regional threat and is not currently
plotting or planning attacks against the U.S. or Europe.
ISIS has repeatedly made threats to attack the U.S. through social and conventional media. Earlier this month, in
a Vice News documentary, a spokesman for the group vowed to "raise the flag of Allah in the White House." The

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

15

group took over Iraq's second largest city, Mosul, in June, and has since declared an Islamic state, or caliphate, in a
swath of territory covering northeastern Syria and northern and western Iraq. U.S. airstrikes and a new policy of direct
military aid to Kurdish Peshmerga fighters have served as a check on a threatened ISIS advance toward Kurdish
territory in northern Iraq.
On Sunday, Dempsey contrasted ISIS to the Yemen-based Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, which has plotted
and attempted attacks against the U.S. and Europe. As a result, the U.S. has conducted counterterrorism strikes
against the group within Yemen.
Dempsey said that so far, there is no sign that the Islamic State militants are engaged in "active plotting
against the homeland, so it's different than that which we see in Yemen."
"I can tell you with great clarity and certainty that if that threat existed inside of Syria that it would certainly be
my strong recommendation that we would deal with it," said Dempsey. "I have every confidence that the president of
the United States would deal with it."
Yes, says the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX), who appeared
on ABC's "This Week" to warn, "Don't kid yourself for a second that they aren't intent on hitting the West," adding
that he believes "external operations" are already under way.

ISIS attributes not a threat to the US


Paul R. Pillar, 8-25, 14, ISIS in Perspective, is Nonresident Senior Fellow at the Center for Security Studies at
Georgetown University and Nonresident Senior Fellow in Foreign Policy at the Brookings Institution, ISIS in Perspective
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/paul-pillar/isis-perspective-11150 DOA 8-27-14
Several attributes of ISIS have repeatedly and correctly been identified as measures of the group's strength, and
aspects of the group's rise that are worthy of notice. These include its seizure of pieces of territory in both Iraq and
Syria, acquisition of financial resources, and enlistment of substantial numbers of westerners. Although these are
impressive indicators of the group's success, none of them is equivalent to a threat to U.S. interests, much less a
physical threat to the United States itselfat least not in the sense of a new danger different from ones that have
been around for some time. Money, for example, has never been the main determinant of whether a group
constitutes a such a danger. Terrorism that makes a difference can be cheap, and one does not need to rob banks in
Mosul or to run an impressive revenue collection operation in order to have enough money to make an impact. Even a
terrorist spectacular on the scale of 9/11 is within the reach of a single wealthy and radically-minded donor to
finance.

No real threat to the involvement of Westerners


Paul R. Pillar, 8-25, 14, ISIS in Perspective, is Nonresident Senior Fellow at the Center for Security Studies at
Georgetown University and Nonresident Senior Fellow in Foreign Policy at the Brookings Institution, ISIS in Perspective
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/paul-pillar/isis-perspective-11150 DOA 8-27-14
The involvement of western citizens with terrorist groups has long been a focus of attention for western police and
internal security services. To the extent this represents a threat, it is not a direct function of any one group's actions
or successes overseas, be they of ISIS or any other group. Several patterns involving westerners' involvement with
foreign terrorist groups are well established. One is that the story has consistently been one of already radicalized
individuals seeking contact with a group rather than the other way around. If it isn't one particular group they seek
out, it will be another. A further pattern is that, despite frequently expressed fears about westerners acquiring
training overseas that they then apply effectively to terrorist operations in the West, this hasn't happened. Faisal
Shahzad and his firecracker-powered attempt at a car bomb in Times Square illustrate the less ominous reality. Yet
another pattern is that apart from a few westerners whose language skills have been exploited for propaganda
purposes, the westerners have become grunts and cannon fodder. They have not been entrusted with sophisticated
plots (unsuccessful shoe bomber Richard Reid being the closest thing to an exception), probably partly because of

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

16

their evident naivet and largely because of groups' concerns about operational security and possible penetration.

Control of land does not make ISIS a threat


Paul R. Pillar, 8-25, 14, ISIS in Perspective, is Nonresident Senior Fellow at the Center for Security Studies at
Georgetown University and Nonresident Senior Fellow in Foreign Policy at the Brookings Institution, ISIS in Perspective
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/paul-pillar/isis-perspective-11150 DOA 8-27-14
The control by a group of a piece of territory, even if it is mostly just sand or mountains, is what most often is taken
mistakenly as a measure of the threat a group poses, and this phenomenon is occurring in spades with ISIS. Probably
seizure of land is interpreted this way because following this aspect of the progress of a group is as simple as looking
at color-coded maps in the newspaper. The history of terrorist operations, including highly salient operations such as
9/11, demonstrates that occupying some real estate is not one of the more important factors that determine
whether a terrorist operation against the United States or another western country can be mounted. To the extent
ISIS devotes itself to seizing, retaining, and administering pieces of real estate in the Levant or Mesopotamiaand
imposing its version of a remaking of society in those piecesthis represents a turn away from, not toward,
terrorism in the West. Significant friction between ISIS (then under a different name) and al-Qaeda first arose when
the former group's concentration on whacking Iraqi Shias was an unhelpful, in the view of the al-Qaeda leadership,
digression from the larger global jihad and the role that the far enemy, the United States, played in it.

ISIS will focus attacks on the Middle East, not the US


Mideast Mirror, August 20, 2014
The vacuous war on ISIS
As for the claim that the 'Islamic State organization' poses a threat to the entire world - with British PM David
Cameron going so far as to say that the threat may reach his country's streets unless it is fought in its cradle - it is a
claim that finds nothing to support it forcefully, at least at the present time. This is because the 'Islamic State' now
seems more determined to use its sword against 'apostate and heretic' Muslims, who refuse to pledge allegiance to
it in Iraq and Syria, than it is interested in using it against anyone else.
Here, sadly, the situation seems as follows: What aggravates the West is not the beheading of Muslims by the
organization, or its attacks on non-Muslims; what aggravates the West is the organization's drawing nearer to vital
strategic areas such as Iraqi Kurdistan. At any rate, it seems somewhat improbable that the threat will move on to
the West or the U.S.; in fact, there seems to be an attempt to exaggerate the threat for reasons that remain
currently unclear.

ISIS is well resourced and plans on attacking the US


James Kittfield, 8-20, The National Journal, August 20, 2014 Why Washington Should Declare War on ISIS
Most importantly, ISIS today represents a direct and growing threat to the United States. It has attracted an estimated
12,000 foreign fighters to its black banner flying over Syrian and Iraqi territory, including hundreds of Europeans and
Americans who can travel freely with Western passports. It has a bigger sanctuary, far more money, and is more
indiscriminately murderous than al-Qaida was on Sept. 10, 2001. ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi has assured anyone
who will listen that he eventually intends to direct his jihad at the United States, telling the U.S. soldiers who released
him from prison in 2009, "I'll see you in New York."

US citizen supporters of ISIS do not threaten the homeland


CNN Wire, August 18, 2014, ISIS: Is it really a threat to the U.S.?

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

17

L
Yet so far no U.S. citizen involved in fighting or supporting the Nusra Front or ISIS has been charged with plotting to
conduct an attack inside the United States despite the fact the war in Syria is now in its fourth year and the war in
Iraq is its 11th year. Indeed, some Americans who have traveled to Syria have ended up dead apparently because
they have no combat experience to speak of; for instance, Nicole Mansfield from Flint, Michigan, was killed in Syria
last year by forces loyal to the Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad.
Further, ISIS' predecessor, al Qaeda in Iraq, never tried to conduct an attack on the American homeland, although it
did bomb three American hotels in Jordan in 2005.
And it's also worth noting that in none of the successful terrorist attacks in the States since 9/11, such as the Boston
Marathon bombings last year or Maj. Nidal Hasan's massacre at Fort Hood, Texas, in 2009, did any of the convicted or
alleged perpetrators receive training overseas.
Returning foreign fighters from the Syrian conflict pose a far greater threat to Europe, which has contributed a much
larger number of foreign fighters to the conflict than the United States, including an estimated 700 from France, 450
from the United Kingdom and 270 from Germany.
Unlike in the United States, European countries have reported specific terrorist plots tied to returning Syrian fighters.
Mehdi Nemmouche, a suspect in the May 24 shootings at a Jewish museum in Brussels, Belgium, that killed four
people, spent about a year with jihadist fighters in Syria, according to the Paris prosecutor in the case. But
Nemmouche's case is the only instance of lethal violence by a returning Syrian fighter in the West.
Still, the United States must consider European foreign fighters returning from Syria as more than a European problem
because many of those returning are from countries that participate in the U.S. visa waiver program and can enter the
States without a visa.
Moreover, experienced al Qaeda operators are present in Syria. As one senior U.S. intelligence official put it to us,
these are veteran members "with strong resumes and full Rolodexes." The wars in Syria and Iraq allow such longtime
fighters to interact with members of other al Qaeda affiliates. For example, in July, the United States adopted
enhanced security measures at airports based on intelligence that bomb-makers from al Qaeda in the Arabian
Peninsula were sharing their expertise in making bombs capable of evading airport security with members of the
Syrian Nusra Front.
Despite these dangers, however, the threat to the United States from foreign fighters in Syria and Iraq remains only a
potential threat.
The administration's airstrikes in Iraq are properly focused upon the more imminent threats to U.S. government
employees and American citizens in the Kurdish city of Irbil who are threatened by ISIS advances and the humanitarian
catastrophe befalling the Yazidi population in areas controlled by the militant forces.
The last time there was a similar exodus of American citizens and residents to an overseas holy war was to Somalia
following the U.S.-backed invasion of Somalia by Ethiopian forces in 2006. More than 40 Americans subsequently went
to Somalia to fight with Al-Shabaab, an al Qaeda-affiliated group.
Just as is the case today in Syria, for a good number of the Americans who went to fight in Somalia it was a one-way
ticket because 15 of the 40 or so American volunteers died there either as suicide attackers or on the battlefield.
In 2011, U.S. Peter King, R-New York, then-chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, warned of
Americans fighting in Somalia. "With a large group of Muslim-Americans willing to die as 'martyrs' and a strong
operational partnership with al Qaeda leaders in Pakistan and in Yemen, al-Shabaab now has more capability than
ever to strike the U.S. homeland."
As it turned out, those Americans who returned from the Somali jihad did not attempt or carry out any kind of
terrorist attack in the States.
Now King is back at it again, telling NBC last week, "ISIS is a direct threat to the United States of America. ... They are
more powerful now than al Qaeda was on 9/11."

ISIS relatively weak militarily and does not present an existential threat
Patrick Buchanan, 8-14, The Lawton Constitution (Oklahoma), Is ISIS 'an existential threat' to our homeland?

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

18

"I think of an American city in flames because of the terrorists' ability to operate in Syria and Iraq," said Graham, "Mr.
President... what is your strategy to stop these people from attacking the homeland?"
This semi-hysterical talk of an "existential threat" to the "homeland," and the dread specter of "an American city in
flames" is vintage war party, designed to panic us into launching a new war.
But before allowing these "Cassandras" to stampede us back into the civil-sectarian Middle East wars that resulted
from our previous interventions, let us inspect more closely what they are saying.
If ISIS' gains are truly an "existential threat" to the republic and our cities are about to "go up in flames," why did these
Republican hawks not demand that President Obama call back Congress from its five-week vacation to vote to
authorize a new war on ISIS in Syria and Iraq?
After all, King, McCain and Graham belong to a party that is suing the president for usurping Congressional powers.
Yet, they are also demanding that Obama start bombing nations he has no authority to bomb, as ISIS has not attacked
us.
King, McCain and Graham want Obama to play imperial president and launch a preemptive war that their own
Congress has not authorized.
What kind of constitutionalists, what kind of conservatives are these?
Is Graham right that an "existential threat" is at hand? Is our very existence as a nation in peril? Graham says no force
in the Mideast can stop ISIL without us. Is this true?
Turkey, a nation of 76 million, has the second-largest army in NATO, equipped with U.S. weapons, and an air force
ISIL does not have.
If President Recep Tayyip Erdogan wanted to crush ISIS, he could seal his border to foreign fighters entering Syria and
send the Turkish army to assist President Bashar Assad in annihilating ISIS in Syria.
The jihadists of the Islamic State may be more motivated, but they are hugely outnumbered and outgunned in the
region.
The Syrian government and army, Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Shia-dominated government of Iraq, a Shia Iran of 70
million, and the Kurds in Syria and Kurdistan are all anti-Islamic State and willing to fight.
All are potential allies in a coalition to contain or crush ISIS, as is Vladimir Putin's Russia, if U.S. diplomacy were not
frozen in the 1980s.
Only last August, McCain and Graham were attacking Obama for not enforcing his "red line" by bombing Syria's army,
the most successful anti-ISIL force in the field.
The threat of the Islamic State should not be minimized. It would provide a breeding and training ground for terrorists
to attack us and the West. But it should not be wildly exaggerated to plunge us into a new war.
For wherever ISIS has won ground, it has, through atrocities and beheadings, imposition of Sharia law, and ruthless
repression, alienated almost everyone, including al-Qaida.

ISIS doesnt present a direct threat to the US


FOX News, 8-25, 14, http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/08/25/joint-chiefs-chairman-says-isis-not-direct-threatto-west-wont-recommend-syria/
Despite threats to the contrary, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff insisted the Islamic State terror group is a
regional threat and said he would not recommend U.S. airstrikes in Syria until he determines that they have
become a direct threat to the U.S. Gen. Martin Dempsey, speaking to reporters on board a military plane traveling to
Afghanistan, said Sunday that he believes the Sunni insurgent group formerly known as ISIS is not currently plotting
or planning attacks against the U.S. or Europe.

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

19

Military Attacks on ISIS Wont Stop Terrorism


Destroying ISIS will lead to terrorism in other forms
Paul R. Pillar, 8-25, 14, ISIS in Perspective, is Nonresident Senior Fellow at the Center for Security Studies at
Georgetown University and Nonresident Senior Fellow in Foreign Policy at the Brookings Institution, ISIS in Perspective
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/paul-pillar/isis-perspective-11150 DOA 8-27-14

And what does destroying the group really mean? Our experience with al-Qaeda should have taught us to ponder
that question long and hard. We killed innumerable number three leaders of al-Qaeda, we killed bin Laden himself,
and we have rendered Ayman al-Zawahiri a largely irrelevant fugitive. We have in effect destroyed the organization, or
at least as much as can be expected from more than 13 years (yes, the process started before 9/11) of destruction. But
the methods we really were worried about lived on through a metastasis that led to the emergence of other
organizations. ISIS is one of those organizations. If ISIS is destroyed, there is little reason to believe that the methods
we most worry about, and associated ideologies, will not take still other forms.

ISIS was created because we tried to destroy a different monster in Iraq


Paul R. Pillar, 8-25, 14, ISIS in Perspective, is Nonresident Senior Fellow at the Center for Security Studies at
Georgetown University and Nonresident Senior Fellow in Foreign Policy at the Brookings Institution, ISIS in Perspective
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/paul-pillar/isis-perspective-11150 DOA 8-27-14
The extent of any terrorist threat to the United States does not depend on killing any one organization. It will depend
partly on those political processes in countries such as Iraq and Syria. It also will depend on how well the United
States, in going after any one monster, does not create other ones. In that regard we cannot remind ourselves often
enoughespecially because this fact seems to have been forgotten amid the current discussion of ISISthat ISIS itself
was born as a direct result of the United States going after a different monster in Iraq.

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

20

Military Attack on ISIS Good


Attacking ISIS necessary to stop future attacks on the US
MailOnline, August 22, 2014
Obama must eradicate ISIS NOW - or pay the price later: Top Marine general says militants must be stamped out
immediately, as Hagel admits they could become more dangerous than Al Qaeda

General John Allen is the latest military leader to speak out against the growing threat of ISIS
Allen, who led international forces in Afghanistan, said the U.S. had to 'eradicate' the terrorism organization now - or
risk attacks in the future
He praised Obama for recent airstrikes, but urged him to 'move quickly to pressure the organisations entire "nervous
system"'
Allen's comments come the same day as Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel warned of the threat from ISIS
Terror network in Iraq and Syria is 'an imminent threat to every interest we have,' he said
Tensions are high in the Obama administration following a gruesome video showing an ISIS Islamist beheading
American journalist James Foley
A top Marine general has warned that President Obama must use the might of the U.S. military to 'eradicate' ISIS
now - or risk paying the price later with more attacks on the West.
General John Allen, who led international forces in Afghanistan, warned that if ISIS is allowed to build a stable base of
power in Iraq and Syria it will be able mount more attacks on Americans and American interests.
He spoke out in DefenseOne, days after the brutal execution of James Foley - and on the day Chuck Hagel admitted
that the threat from ISIS could surpass even that posed by Al Qaeda.
SCROLL DOWN FOR VIDEO
'They are an imminent threat to every interest we have, whether it's in Iraq or anywhere else,' said Hagel on Thursday.
'They are beyond just a terrorist group. They marry ideology, a sophistication of...military prowess. They are
tremendously well-funded. This is beyond anything we've seen.'
Writing for the DefenseOne website, Allen was quick to praise President Obama for the airstrikes he had already
ordered on ISIS camps in northern Iraq, but he went on to urge the President to 'move quickly to pressure the
organisations entire "nervous system", break it up, and destroy its pieces.'
'The U.S. is now firmly in the game and remains the only nation on the planet capable of exerting the kind of
strategic leadership, influence and strike capacity to deal with IS,' he wrote.
'It is also the only power capable of organizing a coalition's reaction to this regional and international threat.'
'This group is not a flash in the pan that will go away of its own accord or if we don't poke at it.'
Allen did not propose a return to ground combat, but urged a 'focused advise and assist' mission to bolster Iraqi and
Kurdish soldiers and non-jihadist Syrian rebels, a commitment that would require a reintroduction of significantly
more US military advisers.
He also warned that the threat from ISIS was not something that was simply limited to the countries in the in Middle
East, but provided a very real treat in the western world too.
ISIS foot soldiers with U.K., European, and American passports pose a serious threat to all our safety, he warned - and
the organization was clearly more advanced than al-Qaeda.
'It's worth remembering the Taliban provided the perfect platform from which al-Qaeda attacked the U.S., and the
Taliban were and remain as cavemen in comparison to ISIS,' he wrote.
General Allen denied that the U.S. military was war weary and was fully capable of attacking and reducing ISIS.
'We should do it now, but supported substantially by our traditional allies and partners, especially by those in the
region who have the most to give - and the most to lose - if the Islamic State's march continues.'
Allen wrote that James Foley's killing 'embodies' the threat from Isis, which he called 'an entity beyond the pale of

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update
humanity'. 'If we delay now, we will pay later,' he warned.
General Allen's comments came hours after Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel dramatically upgraded the U.S.
government's estimation of the threats America faces from the terrorist organization.
ISIS is 'as sophisticated and well-funded as any group that we have seen,' Hagel told a group of reporters during a
joint press conference he held with Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey.
'They're beyond just a terrorist group.They marry ideology and a sophistication of strategic and tactical military
prowess. They are tremendously well funded....This is beyond anything we've seen, so we must prepare for
everything.'

21

22

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

Should Strike in Syria


If we dont strike in Syria, ISIL fighters will flee to Syria and hide there
MailOnline, August 26, 2014, White House says Obama could attack ISIS in Syria 'regardless of borders' and WITHOUT
approval from Congress
No such welcome has been extended by Bashar al-Assad, the decidedly anti-American dictator in Damascus.
ISIS enjoys influence across a wide swath of land in both Iraq and Syria, presenting the Pentagon with the possibility
that decisive victories in Iraq could drive the group to safe haven in Assad's country.
Defeating them there could present the Pentagon with an unwelcome outcome if the terror group's forces regroup
inside Syria.
ISIS also represents a threat to Assad's rule, meaning that crushing ISIS once and for all could have the unintended
consequence of strengthening the strongman.
Calling on the example of Navy SEAL raid that killed al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden on Pakistani soil, Earnest
suggested Monday that Assad's assent to chase ISIS past where Iraqi territory ends wouldn't be required.
'The United States was not invited in by the Pakistani government' to take out bin Laden, Earnest reminded reporters.
'That was a decision the president made.'

Cant get rid of ISIS by only attacking them in Iraq


MailOnline, August 22, 2014
Obama must eradicate ISIS NOW - or pay the price later: Top Marine general says militants must be stamped out
immediately, as Hagel admits they could become more dangerous than Al Qaeda
Dempsey added later in the briefing that ISIS can't practically be contained in Iraq, since it also has deep roots and
tremendous resources across the Syrian border.
The terror group 'has an apocalyptic end-of-days strategic vision that will eventually have to be defeated,' the general
explained.
'Can they be defeated without addressing that part of the organization that resides in Syria? The answer is no. That
will have to be addressed on both sides of what is essentially at this point a nonexistent border.'

23

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

Should Not Strike in Syria


5 reasons air strikes in Syria will fail
Aaron David Miller, 8-25, 14 is vice president for new initiatives and a distinguished scholar at the Woodrow Wilson
International Center for Scholars. His forthcoming book is titled The End of Greatness: Why America Can't Have (and
Doesn't Want) Another Great President, Foreign Policy, The Islamic States Home Field Advantage,
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/08/25/the_islamic_state_home_field_advantage_syria_iraq_obama_airs
trikes?wp_login_redirect=0 DOA 8-27-14
And yet it seems that the White House's answer is to just grab another hammer -- to start slamming IS on both sides of
the Syria-Iraq border.
Barack Obama is still a risk-averse president, particularly when it comes to the use of force in the Middle East. But like
a moth to a flame, realities on the ground, the logic of the situation, and his own calculus are irrepressibly drawing
him closer to using air power in Syria.
Here are five reasons why it's not such a great idea. Let's quickly lay out the downsides of striking IS in Syria -- and
then move to the reasons the president is increasingly likely to do so anyway.
1. Syria isn't Iraq: In Iraq, the United States has several advantages that could make airstrikes against the Islamic State
reasonably effective, including reliable Kurdish allies, the chance of standing up U.S.-trained Iraqi defense forces,
intelligence assets, U.S. special operators on the ground, and at least a chance to forge a political reconciliation in
Baghdad that might ease the disaffection and alienation of Iraqi Sunnis on which IS now feeds.
Syria has none of these. And none are soon coming, even if the United States gets serious about training and
equipping those elusive Syrian moderates or creating an entirely new military force. Indeed, in this regard, Syria has
always been a witches' brew of negatives. And it's tough to see that changing now, even with a belated and more
focused U.S. effort to provide weapons and support to the moderate rebels.
Just look at a few of the obstacles to consistent support: a dizzying array of divided and dysfunctional rebel groups,
external backers whose motives are diametrically opposed (see: Saudi Arabia and Qatar), and a Free Syrian Army that
in the words of the Monkey Cage's Marc Lynch was always more fiction than reality. This landscape has fueled the
Islamic State's rise and has simultaneously limited the effectiveness of outside intervention, including airstrikes.
2. Airstrikes won't work: To have a chance of hitting the right targets with any consistency, those 500-pound
American bombs require local allies on the ground to provide forward spotters and good intelligence. Airstrikes, as we
saw in the open desert of Libya during the 2011 intervention, are better suited against militaries concentrating and
moving in open areas than against local militias that have taken root. Take for instance Raqqa, the headquarters of the
Islamic State's caliphate. There's no way an air assault in that urbanized and populated environment would work.
The idea that a bombing campaign alone -- even if it's devastating and sustained -- will seriously check, let alone
defeat, IS in Syria is a flat-out illusion. And I say this knowing all of the Islamic State's many weaknesses: a governing
ideology that alienates, weak or nonexistent opponents, and the absence of deep roots and legitimacy in Syria. The
Islamic State has drawn support not just from Bashar al-Assad's brutal repression of Sunnis, but from former Iraqi
Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's repressive policies toward Iraq's Sunnis. Indeed, IS's roots are in Mesopotamia and
lead back to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI). It's not a coincidence that the megalomaniacal "Caliph
Ibrahim" is actually named Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. Damascus or Raqqa may be important, but they're only a means to
achieve the more important goal -- a caliphate based in Baghdad.

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

24

Still, IS is now ensconced in its host Syrian environment like a barnacle attached to the side of a boat. If you believe
that it can be defeated or rolled back without a major ground campaign either by the United States or its allies on the
ground and without the emergence of stable and good governance on both sides of the Iraq-Syria border, I've got a
great tip on some yellowcake in Niger I'd like to sell you.
3. Americans ain't interested: Polls suggest most Americans don't like Obama's foreign policy. Who would? It's messy
and seemingly devoid of strategy, and he hasn't had a slam dunk since whacking Osama bin Laden. To try to sell
another ground war in Iraq (and/or Syria) with grandiose conflict-ending goals won't be politically popular or even
feasible. Look at the quandary Congress confronted in 2013 when asked to authorize limited airstrikes in Syria in
response to Assad's use of chemical weapons. I was told calls to some congressional offices were running 10 to one
against. Given IS's particularly unique brutality, today's politics might sustain airstrikes, special operators, drone
strikes, and the supply of weapons to the rebels. But much more beyond that seems unlikely now.
The only circumstance that might engender the kind of political consensus to sustain a comprehensive military
strategy to defeat IS would be an attack on the homeland. But even after America's sad experience in Iraq, it would
have to be a pretty significant event to justify anything more than a tactical response. You can blame Obama all you
want for the rise of IS -- heading to the exits too quickly in Iraq and not supporting Syria's moderate rebels early
enough -- but his predecessor's unpopular policies in Iraq gave birth to the group that is now the Islamic State.
Americans are right to be cautious about being scared into another quixotic Iraqi adventure.
4. The homeland's doing just fine: Terrorism isn't a strategic threat to the United States right now. Last year, the State
Department's annual terrorism report identified 17,891 global fatalities to terrorism; 16 of those were Americans. And
despite the Islamic State declaring its intention to fly the flag of Allah from the White House, the reality is that it's very
unlikely the group will ever be an existential threat to the homeland. But with the money, weapons, passports, foreign
fighters, and sanctuaries it has been acquiring, the Islamic State clearly poses a significant risk to the United States and
its allies.
James Foley's murder isn't the equivalent of 9/11. But former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell's warnings that IS
has declared war on the United States and that he wouldn't be surprised if a member opened fire with an AK-47 at a
U.S. mall has shifted the image of the group as a distant regional threat to one here at home.
Indeed, the chilling picture of a masked terrorist executing Foley has brought the conflict home, making a bunch of
crazy terrorists killing people in a far-off region a deeply personal and American problem.
But I think few people would argue that Obama should make a major military commitment in Syria to avenge the life
of one American.
5. Assad still isn't our friend: The final downside hasn't changed in four years. Any campaign to weaken the Islamic
State will help out Assad. Many analysts argue that IS, in fact, is a creation of the Assad regime, which has used the
brutality of this Islamist group to present the message to would-be enemies in Washington and other capitals that
Damascus is defending Syria from a fate far worse. After reportedly releasing up to 1,000 hardened prisoners in 2012
and willfully avoiding the targeting of IS positions, the Syrian regime has finally gotten serious about trying to weaken
the Islamic State as the jihadists have moved against regime facilities in northeastern Syria.
The alignment, however indirect, of U.S. and Syrian regime interests may be an inconvenient truth, but it's hardly a
shocker. Assad is killing his own people and radicalizing Sunni jihadists, but unlike the Islamic State, he hasn't singled
out the United States or Europe as a primary target of his military campaign. And though he might be a coldblooded
killer, his status quo mentality and secularism don't quite alarm us in the way that IS's nihilist fundamentalists do.
Nobody is calling for a U.S. alliance with Assad. But it seems clear that Washington has accepted the reality that his
regime is going to survive.

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

25

26

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

Should Strike ISIS


Allowing ISIS to maintain a base in Iraq enables it to export terrorism
Betsy Hiel, 8-17, 2014, Pittsburgh Tribune Review, ISIS puts U.S. in its bull's-eye, Kurds say
Meanwhile, ISIS's victories are producing more volunteers and support elsewhere.
Sympathizers in London distributed ISIS fliers, and those in Germany attacked Yazidi immigrants; when ISIS supporters
rallied in The Hague, the mayor there canceled a counter-demonstration.
A Canadian was killed while fighting for ISIS in Iraq, according to media reports; other media tell of European women
joining the terror group. On Twitter, a British ISIS member boasted of holding Yazidi women as slaves.
If ISIS maintains a base in Syria or Iraq, Attoof said, "of course, it would be so easy for them to export terror
anywhere they want in the world."
Said Shwan: "If ISIS takes Kurdistan, you will have lost the only pillar of democracy in Iraq. ISIS represents a threat to
all of us, particularly the United States."

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

27

Air Strikes Alone Wont Solve ISIS in Syria


Air strikes will not stop ISIS in Syria
Adam Taylor, Washington Post Blogs, August 27, 2014, The Islamic State or Assad? Isn't there another choice?;
Looking for the 'good guy' in the Syrian fight.
It also seems absurd given another other obvious choice that seems to be getting relatively scant attention: Working
with the other Syrian opposition groups to fight both Assad and Islamic State. These opposition groups certainly don't
want the U.S. to side with Assad, but they do want help fight the Islamic State and advocate a strong role for
themselves.
"The Syrian Opposition fully supports a comprehensive U.S.-led campaign to launch military strikes in Syria against the
Islamic State terrorist army and al-Qaeda affiliates," Oubai Shahbandar, an adviser to the Free Syria Foreign Mission in
Washington D.C., explains. "The anti-Islamic State resistance on the ground is led by the Free Syrian Army and tribes."
The Free Syrian Army itself seems to advocate something even broader.
"Airstrikes against ISIS inside Syria will not be helpful," Hussam al-Marie, the spokesman for the group in northern
Syria, told The Daily Beast. "Airstrikes will not get rid of ISIS. Airstrikes are like just tickling ISIS."

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

28

International Coalition Needed


Only an international effort can defeat the ISIS
New York Times (editorial), 8-24, 14, http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/25/opinion/a-necessary-response-toisis.html?_r=0 A Necessary Response to ISIS DOA 8-27
The United States cannot go it alone in the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, the extremist group
known as ISIS whose ruthlessness and killing has dumbfounded and horrified the civilized world.
American airstrikes and other assistance from the United States have brought some measure of relief to religious
minorities and others that ISIS has threatened. But defeating, or even substantially degrading, ISIS will require an
organized, longer-term response involving a broad coalition of nations, including other Muslim countries, and
addressing not only the military threat but political and religious issues.
The recent persecution of Christians and Yazidis and the murder of James Foley, an American journalist, has brought
ISISs savagery into full view. On Thursday, Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said ISIS
posed an immediate threat to the West, in addition to Iraq, because thousands of Europeans and other foreigners
who have joined the group and have the passports to travel freely could carry the fight back to their home countries
including the United States.
Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel was equally emphatic. ISIS, he warned, is beyond anything that weve seen because
it is extremely well-financed and has demonstrated sophistication and tactical skill in its campaign to impose an
Islamic caliphate by brute force. Other analysts have gone so far as to describe ISIS as one of the most successful
extremist groups in history because of its ability to seize and hold large sections of two countries Iraq and Syria
with what seems like blinding speed.
While the group poses a risk to the United States and the West, those paying the biggest price are Muslims. Thats
why President Obama was correct to argue that from governments and peoples across the Middle East, there has to
be a common effort to extract this cancer so that it does not spread. Making this happen will take American
leadership, but, so far, neither he nor Americas allies have laid out a coherent vision of exactly what this fight might
entail or how to achieve success.
The response to the immediate crisis has been prudent. The United States has insisted that Iraqs government and
army set aside longstanding rivalries and work with the pesh merga militia of Kurdistan to back up American airstrikes
by fighting ISIS on the ground. Germany, Italy, Britain and France have promised weapons.
The politics of Iraq, however, remain dangerously unsettled. The United States successfully pressed for a change from
Nuri Kamal al-Maliki as prime minister in Iraq because only a more inclusive leader would have any chance of unifying
the country against the ISIS threat. And, in a rare convergence of interests, Iran also withdrew its support from Mr.
Maliki, resulting in the appointment of a new leader, Haider al-Abadi. But Parliament has yet to give final approval to
the new government, thus prolonging political uncertainties that undermine the fight against ISIS.
The prospects of defeating ISIS would be greatly improved if other Muslim nations could see ISIS for the threat it is.
But, like Iraq, they are mired in petty competitions and Sunni-Shiite religious divisions and many have their own
relations with extremists of one kind or another. ISIS has received financing from donors in Kuwait and Qatar. Saudi
Arabia funneled weapons to Syrian rebels and didnt care if they went to ISIS. Turkey allowed ISIS fighters and
weapons to flow across porous borders. All of that has to stop.

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

29

Once again we are invited to a war of ciilvilzations and our extreme right war party, the one that say we cannot afford
higher wages, the... we are wasting our time and energy on this. there will always be an "ISIS" in that part of the
world. there will always be one angry...
This editorial calls for an international effort to combat ISIS, but never mentions the United Nations. As C.J. Tams has
argued in The...
Creating a regional military force may be required, including assistance from the Gulf Cooperation Council countries
and Turkey. It certainly will require money, intelligence-sharing, diplomatic cooperation and a determined plan to
cut off financing to ISIS and the flow of ISIS fighters between states. Frances suggestion for an international
conference deserves consideration.

A comprehensive military response coordinated with allies is needed to arrest the ISIS
threat.
Thai News Service, August 27, 2014, United States: US Lawmakers Urge Obama to Expand Military Action Against
Islamic

State

The U.S. Congress is in recess and members are scattered across the country in their home districts.
But a number of congressional leaders appeared on Sunday talk shows to voice alarm about the threat posed by the
Islamic State militant group in the wake of the brutal murder of American journalist James Foley.
The Republican chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, Michael McCaul [said] that the Islamic State,
also known as ISIS, presents the greatest threat the world has seen since the September 11th terrorist attacks of
2001.
"This has been festering for the past year, and now it is culminating with the killing and beheading of an American
journalist, which I think is a turning point [for] the American people," McCaul said on ABC's This Week. "It has sort of
opened their eyes to what ISIS really is."
The Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Mike Rogers, agreed. Rogers told NBC's Meet the
Press that some fighters from Europe and the United States who have gone to the Middle East to join the terrorist
network could travel easily back to the West.
They are one plane ticket away from U.S. shores and that's why we're so concerned about it," he said.
Retired U.S. Marine General John Allen agreed on the seriousness of the threat, and said the United States needs to
take a regional approach, working with its allies.
It's going to require a comprehensive approach," Allen said on This Week. "It's got to be more than simple pinpoint
attacks on key ISIS locations that are just security locations in and around dams.

International coalition needed to defeat the ISIS


The News Press, August 26, 2014, http://www.news-press.com/story/opinion/contributors/2014/08/23/sen-rubioisis-national-security-threat/14472357/ DOA 8-27-14
West must take fight to Islamic extremists

While airstrikes, a new government in Baghdad that may fulfill President Obama's call for "inclusiveness," and
support for Kurdish and other forces battling ISIS, are all helpful, something more is needed. An international
coalition of armies must be created to fight and defeat ISIS.
The preliminary "targeting" is already happening. The Mail Online reports that ISIS supporters recently distributed

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

30

leaflets on Oxford Street in London. They want people to abandon Britain and join the new Islamic state.
Scotland Yard says it's investigating to see whether any anti-terror laws were broken. If not, new laws should be
passed. This is sedition and any nation that tolerates sedition aids in its own demise. If seditionists are aliens, they
should be deported; if they are citizens, they should be arrested.
Straight talk from British Prime Minister David Cameron: "... this threat cannot simply be removed by airstrikes alone.
We need a tough, intelligent and patient long-term approach that can defeat the terrorist threat at (its) source."
The "source" is Islamism and because it is an amalgam of religious and political doctrines, people regarded as infidels
and deserving of death do not have enough diplomats to dissuade them.
Cameron said Britain has recently strengthened its Immigration Act "to deprive naturalized Britons of their citizenship
if they are suspected of being involved in terrorist activities." He should advocate the same for native born Britons
who are being radicalized. Mosques that preach hatred of Christians, Jews and the West should be closed and their
imams deported or arrested.
As Cameron correctly noted, "We are in the middle of a generational struggle against a poisonous ideology, which I
believe we will be fighting for the rest of my political lifetime."

Only an international coalition can defeat ISIS


Mideast Mirror, August 20, 2014
The vacuous war on ISIS
All of these accounts [of ISIS's rise] are unanimous on three main points that can be presented as follows: First, the
battle with this organization will be long and is not expected to be decided soon. Second, the organization does not
pose a threat to Iraq and Syria only; it threatens the entire world. Third, there is no possibility of destroying this
organization without the broadest possible international coalition. It is noteworthy that none of these points now
seems the subject of a serious treatment, at least as far as is known by a public opinion that is terrified by what is
happening - Mohammad Kureishan in pan-Arab al-Quds al-Arabi
Terrorism is terrorism. There is no such thing as acceptable terrorism versus unacceptable terrorism. Moreover, for
those who do not know this, ISIS acts independently of other organizations, while the other terrorist organizations and
groups are linked by the strings of terrorism to al-Qa'ida, the most important terrorism headquarters in the world Ass'ad 'Abboud in Syrian ath-Thawra
While all accounts of the rise of the ISIS (Islamic State in Iraq and Syria) phenomenon are unanimous that the battle
with it will be long, that ISIS poses a threat to the entire world, and that there is need to form an international
coalition to fight it, no serious steps are being taken on any of these points, warns a Tunisian commentator. The West
and its regional lackeys are hypocritical in their alleged war on ISIS, claims a Syrian commentator. They are all willing
to tolerate terrorism so far as they can use it to promote their aims, as shown by their failure to denounce other
terrorist groups operating in Syria.
A PUZZLING ENIGMA: "A puzzling enigma! A terrifying nightmare! A complex conspiracy!" writes Tunisian
commentator Mohammad Kureishan in Wednesday's Qatari-owned, pan-Arab daily al-Quds al-Arabi.
The assessment of what is happening in Iraq and Syria - the Islamic State's frightening expansion, especially now that it
is estimated to control around 35% of Iraqi territories and 30% of Syrian territories - has used one or all of the above
characterizations. But even so, none of those who spoke of an enigma were able to solve any of its riddles; nor have
those who were terrified by the nightmare been able to practically make clear what may result from it; nor, for that
matter, have those who believe in the existence of a conspiracy succeeded in exposing which of its elements lies
hidden.
The problem here is that, the harder observers try to understand the phenomenon, the more confused they get,
especially when in their search for a satisfactory account they oscillate between historical, social, and cultural
explanations of the phenomenon of bloody extremism in religion's name; explanations offered by political experts and

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

31

analysts of the facts on the ground; and regional and international official responses to it.
Despite this, all of these accounts are unanimous on three main points that can be presented as follows:
- First, the battle with this organization will be long and is not expected to be decided soon.
- Second, the organization does not pose a threat to Iraq and Syria only; it threatens the entire world.
- Third, there is no possibility of destroying this organization without the broadest possible international coalition.
It is noteworthy that none of these points now seems the subject of a serious treatment, at least as far as is known by
a public opinion that is terrified by what is happening.

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

32

US Leadership Necessary to Build an International Coalition


US working to build an international coalition to fight the ISIS, more diplomatic effort is
needed
Helen Cooper, 8-26, 14, US Mobilizes Allies to Widen Assault on ISIS, New York Times,
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/27/world/middleeast/us-mobilizes-allies-to-widen-assault-on-isis.html?_r=0 DOA
8/27/14
The United States has begun to mobilize a broad coalition of allies behind potential American military action in Syria
and is moving toward expanded airstrikes in northern Iraq, administration officials said on Tuesday.
President Obama, the officials said, was broadening his campaign against the Sunni militants of the Islamic State in
Iraq and Syria and nearing a decision to authorize airstrikes and airdrops of food and water around the northern Iraqi
town of Amerli, home to members of Iraqs Turkmen minority. The town of 12,000 has been under siege for more
than two months by the militants.
Rooting out a cancer like ISIL wont be easy, and it wont be quick, Mr. Obama said in a speech on Tuesday to the
American Legion in Charlotte, N.C., using an alternative name for ISIS. He said that the United States was building a
coalition to take the fight to these barbaric terrorists, and that the militants would be no match for a united
international community. dministration officials characterized the dangers facing the Turkmen, who are Shiite
Muslims considered infidels by ISIS, as similar to the threat faced by thousands of Yazidis, who were driven to Mount
Sinjar in Iraq after attacks by the militants. The United Nations special representative for Iraq, Nickolay Mladenov, said
in a statement three days ago that the situation in Amerli demands immediate action to prevent the possible
massacre of its citizens.
As Mr. Obama considered new strikes, the White House began its diplomatic campaign to enlist allies and neighbors in
the region to increase their support for Syrias moderate opposition and, in some cases, to provide support for
possible American military operations. The countries likely to be enlisted include Australia, Britain, Jordan, Qatar,
Saudi Arabia, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates, officials said.
The officials, who asked not to be named discussing sensitive internal deliberations, said they expected that Britain
and Australia would be willing to join the United States in an air campaign. The officials said they also wanted help
from Turkey, which has military bases that could be used to support an effort in Syria.
Turkey is a transit route for foreign fighters, including those from the United States and Europe who have traveled to
Syria to join ISIS. Administration officials said they are now asking officials in Ankara to help tighten the border. The
administration is also seeking intelligence and surveillance help from Jordan as well as financial help from Saudi
Arabia, which bankrolls groups in Syria that are fighting President Bashar al-Assad.
On Monday the Pentagon began surveillance flights over Syria in an effort to collect information on possible ISIS
targets as a precursor to airstrikes, a senior official said. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, an organization
that monitors the humanitarian consequences of the conflict in Syria, reported that non-Syrian spy planes on
Monday carried out surveillance of ISIS positions in the eastern province of Deir Ezzor.Although Americas allies in the
region have plenty of reasons to support an intensified effort against ISIS, analysts said, the United States will have to
navigate tensions among them.

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

33

One of the problems is that different countries have different clients among the fighting groups in Syria, said Robert
S. Ford, a former American ambassador to Syria. To get them all to work together, the best thing would be for them
to pick one client and funnel all the funds through that client. Youve got to pick one command structure.
But persuading counties to help the United States in a military campaign in Syria will require more effort,
administration officials said. Turkey, for example, is in the midst of a political transition, with Prime Minister Recep
Tayyip Erdogan ascending to the presidency.
His likely successor as prime minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, has been deeply immersed in Syria as foreign minister. The
White House, meanwhile, has been unable to win Senate confirmation of a new ambassador to Turkey, John Bass,
leaving the post vacant at a critical time.
Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf emirates are important as a source of funding for the rebels, but there are strains
among them. Qatar, for example, helped negotiate the release of an American hostage, Peter Theo Curtis, who was
being held by a less extreme militant group, the Nusra Front. But Saudi Arabia does not talk to the Nusra Front, and
the Obama administration has sought to navigate between the feuding gulf countries.
Enlisting the Sunni neighbors of Syria is crucial, experts said, because airstrikes alone will not be enough to push
back ISIS. The administration, Mr. Ford said, needs to pursue a sequential strategy that begins with gathering
intelligence, followed by targeted airstrikes, more robust and better coordinated support for the moderate rebels, and
finally, a political reconciliation process similar to that underway in Iraq.
The White House is also debating how to satisfy a second constituency, Congress. Mr. Obamas advisers are
considering whether to seek congressional authorization for expanded military action and if so, under what legal
rationale. Lawmakers had been reluctant to vote on airstrikes in Iraq, but several have begun arguing that the broader
action being contemplated by Mr. Obama would demand a vote in Congress.
I do not believe that our expanded military operations against ISIL are covered under existing authorizations from
Congress, said Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia, a Democratic member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Senator Bob Corker, the Tennessee Republican who is the ranking member of the Foreign Relations Committee, said
on MSNBC that Congress needed to own any further military action against the militants.
On Tuesday, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said in a statement that seven Western countries had pledged to provide
weapons and ammunition to Kurdish forces who are fighting ISIS in northern Iraq.
Albania, Canada, Croatia, Denmark, France, Italy and Britain have committed to sending arms and equipment to the
Kurds, Mr. Hagel said, adding that operations would accelerate in coming days with more nations also expected to
contribute.
Rear Adm. John Kirby, the Pentagon press secretary, said Albania and Britain had started moving supplies to the Kurds.

US leadership necessary to build a coalition against the ISIS


The Cincinnati Enquirer (Ohio), August 26, 2014 , US must present united front on ISIS, p. A7,
FredKundrata, Retired Air Force Lt. Col. Fred Kundrata is the Democratic nominee for Congress in Ohio's 1st District.
Having served in the Air Force for 28 years, including combat time in the Persian Gulf War, I know that decisions to

34

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update
pursue military action should never be taken lightly. But ISIS presents a new kind of threat, a terrorist army with
more than 10,000 fighters, American-made weapons and billions in cash.
The United States must present a united front to the world on this critical national security issue.

Congress should put partisanship aside and pass a resolution that gives President Barack Obama the authority he
needs to take on ISIS.
In addition, Congress should fast-track funding for Kurdish and moderate Syrian forces, as requested by Defense
Secretary Chuck Hagel, that won't be available until Oct. 1. With the backing of Congress, the president will have clear
authority to expand the mission, within defined parameters, and pursue the objective of destroying ISIS wherever it
exists.
To be clear, I am not advocating for ground combat troops to re-enter Iraq. However, additional troops in supportive
roles, with a cautious eye toward mission creep, may be needed. American leadership and air power are necessary to
win this conflict, but so are the efforts of our European and Middle Eastern allies. For that reason, the support of
Congress must be conditional on the president's building a coalition of nations, in particular Arab States, so that the
United States is not acting alone.
Building a coalition is not unrealistic; calls for action from European and Middle Eastern leaders are being put forth
daily. Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt, among others, have declared war on radical Islam due to suicide bombings and
terrorist attacks within their own borders. The Arab League, Qatar, Tunisia and Bahrain condemned the murder of
journalist James Foley, and they fear the rise of ISIS in their own countries. We can also count on the Kurds, who are
fierce fighters and have been our allies since the Persian Gulf War.
Ultimately, the answer to ISIS lies in a stable, inclusive Iraqi government, coupled with a watchful eye toward Syria.

US must assemble an international coalition to defeat ISIS


The Messenger (Madisonville, Kentucky), August 26, 2014 Tuesday, ISIS

a 'national security threat'

Writing in National Review Online, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) says: "Allowing the Islamic State and its jihadist leaders
to maintain their newly established caliphate in the heart of the Middle East is a national security threat to the
United States and to our allies in the region."
While airstrikes, a new government in Baghdad that may, or may not fulfill President Obama's call for "inclusiveness,"
and support for Kurdish and other forces battling ISIS, are all helpful, something more is needed. An international
coalition of armies must be created to fight and defeat ISIS. While the U.S. and Britain might help assemble it, the
coalition should be led by the Kurds and Muslim nations. If ISIS and the other fanatics don't represent true Islam, the
"moderates" should take the lead in restoring not only their good name, but a semblance of order. President Obama
needs to say that victory is, in fact, the goal. Our enemies are certainly fighting to win.
Echoing Sen. Rubio is British Prime Minister David Cameron, who wrote for The Sunday Telegraph that what ISIS is
doing in Iraq and Syria affects us all and "we have no choice but to rise to the challenge" in defeating it. "If we do
not act to stem the onslaught of this exceptionally dangerous terrorist movement," he added, "it will only grow
stronger until it can target us on the streets of Britain."

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

35

A2: A Political Resolution Will Save Iraq


A political resolution will not be achieved
Ben Hubbard, 8-24, 14, The New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/24/world/middleeast/response-toattack-reflects-iraqs-sectarian-divide.html, Response to Attack Reflects Iraq's Sectarian Divide, p. 9
Iraq's politicians were struggling to meet the constitutional deadline to form a new government when, in an isolated
village, two masked men stepped into a Sunni mosque and opened fire on Friday, killing dozens of worshipers.
Within hours, Sunni leaders said they were pulling out of the negotiations, and the political process was suddenly
jammed again by the same sectarian rifts that have long bedeviled this country.
The formation of a new, inclusive government that could command some support from both Sunnis and Shiites is
widely seen as a vital first step in confronting jihadists from the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, who have stormed into
Iraq, seizing territory and taking control of major cities in the north and west. President Obama has hailed the
appointment of a new prime minister, Haider al-Abadi, and many observers hope that Mr. Abadi will undo the policies
of his predecessor, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, who has been accused of marginalizing Iraq's Sunni minority and, in effect,
opening the way for the advance of the Sunni militant group.
But only a new government can undo those policies, which included the revitalization of Shiite militias, the arrests of
many Sunni men, and military strikes on Sunni areas in which civilians were killed.
The problem here now, highlighted by the swift fallout from the mosque attack, is that sectarian polarization has
grown so deep that it could prevent such a government from being formed.
Sunnis and Shiites tend to view many of the country's most pressing issues through profoundly different lenses,
making compromise difficult. Shiite leaders speak of ISIS as a terrorist threat that must be battled with all available
means. Some have even accused Sunni leaders of providing political cover for the extremists.
''Politicians are responsible for the security collapse in some provinces,'' Qais al-Khazali, the head of Asaib Ahl al-Haq,
the Shiite militia that may be the most feared by Sunnis, said in a statement. ''They are still in the stage of being loyal
to their parties, not to Iraq,'' he said.
Sunni leaders also condemn ISIS, but they say that the group exploited a vacuum that the government created by
marginalizing their regions and abusing their people.
''The only way to fight ISIS is to support the citizens who lost their dignity and their rights under the old government,''
said Ahmed al-Dulaimi, the governor of Anbar Province, which is now largely held by ISIS.
Similar rifts were clear on Saturday as political leaders responded to the attack that killed dozens of Sunni worshipers
in a mosque in Diyala Province.
Salim al-Jibouri, the Sunni speaker of Parliament, called for political unity and said the attack sought to ''foil all the
efforts that have been made to form a government.''
The two gunmen who carried out the attack melted into the countryside afterward, and their identities were not clear.
But Mr. Jibouri and others appeared to assume that they were Shiite militiamen. Mr. Jibouri said a committee had
been sent to investigate the attack and would report within two days. ''As we condemn what ISIS does, we also have
to denounce what the militias are doing,'' Mr. Jibouri said.
By contrast, Shiite leaders blamed ISIS for the mosque attack. The radical Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr called it ''a
clear sectarian escalation'' and said it had the ''explicit touch of ISIS.''
The negotiations to form a new government were already fraught before the attack, as Sunni politicians pushed
demands that they considered necessary but had little chance of being accepted. They included a halt to
government shelling and airstrikes on Sunni areas where ISIS is present; the withdrawal of Shiite militias from
predominantly Sunni cities; the release of Sunni detainees who have not been convicted of crimes; the dismissal of
criminal charges against a number of Sunni politicians, which they call politically motivated; and the cancellation of
the law banning former members of Saddam Hussein's regime from holding government posts.
Foreign diplomats in Baghdad were concerned that those demands would prevent a deal, and urged Sunni leaders to
be more flexible.

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

36

Zaid al-Ali, a former legal adviser to the United Nations in Iraq and the author of a book on Iraq's future, said the
American insistence on inclusive politics was misguided. Iraq's recent governments have included representatives
from all the major sects, he noted, ''But this is not a solution -- it has never translated into the trickle-down politics
that everyone assumed it would.''
Western officials in Baghdad acknowledge that a new government would be only a first, modest step in a long process
of necessary reform.
Highlighting the amount of distrust, many Sunnis immediately blamed the mosque attack on Shiite militias.
''What happened was a mass execution in cold blood,'' said a Sunni resident who lives near the attacked mosque, and
who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he feared retribution. ''That was a message to tell us that our time
on this land has finished.''
Abdul-Salam Hashim, a 55-year-old Sunni shopkeeper in Baghdad, said, ''I'm with any kind of revenge against this
cowardly crime.'' He added, ''This is what Maliki has left to Iraq, and it will not end easily.''
The Shiite militias, many of them originally formed to fight American forces, were supported by Mr. Maliki and called
back into service to fight ISIS. But Sunnis consider them little more than gangs operating outside the law, and
human rights groups have accused them of killing and detaining Sunni civilians.
Even so, in many areas they have been the factor that halted ISIS' advance, and they are so embedded in the current
political reality that even the transportation minister, Hadi al-Amari, heads a powerful militia.
The leader of a local Shiite militia in the area near the mosque, Sheikh Abdel-Samad al-Zarkoushi, struck out at those
who want to disband his group, saying it is necessary to fight ISIS.
''How can the politicians tell us what to do, when they don't know what is happening in our region?'' said Sheikh
Zarkoushi. ''If I withdrew from the area, that would be goodbye for everyone. ISIS would take it over in a few hours.''
The violence in Iraq continued on Saturday, with three car bombs exploding in the northern city of Kirkuk, killing 21
people and wounding 100, security officials said. Several more attacks were reported in other areas.
The American air campaign against ISIS targets in the north continued as well. A vehicle operated by militants was
destroyed near the Mosul Dam, according to the American military's Central Command. The newest attack brings to
94 the number of American airstrikes since President Obama approved the mission; 61 have been aimed at pushing
back ISIS fighters near the dam.

Hyperpartisanship now
Kimberly Haas, 8-23, 14 Foster's Daily Democrat, Dover, N.H, Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Business News, August
23, 2014, Collins:

Obama's policy ' ... has undermined America's place in the world'

Aug. 23--DOVER -- U.S. Senator Susan Collins said on Friday that she feels like the world is on fire.
"There is so much going on in the world today that I don't even know where to begin," Collins said as she sat down for
a meeting at Foster's Daily Democrat.
Collins, who is known for pulling together the Common Sense Coalition, a group of 18 senators from both sides of the
aisle and independent Angus King of Maine, said that the country lacks the kind of leadership in Washington to deal
with the problems facing a modern America. As a result, issues such as the national debt, transportation, foreign
policy, defense and illegal immigration are not attended to as hyperpartisanship stalls progress in the House of
Representatives and Senate.

Defeating ISIS requires an international coalition


CNN Wire, August 22, 2014 , Is Obama heading toward air strikes in Syria?
and Kurdish forces against the lightning ISIS sweep through the north. Earlier this month, the President authorized
limited air strikes on ISIS targets and additional advisers to Iraq to protect U.S. personnel and minority groups
threatened by the Sunni extremists.
Hagel emphasized the ISIS threat on Thursday, calling it "beyond just a terrorist group."

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

37

"They marry ideology, a sophistication of strategic and tactical military prowess. They are tremendously well-funded,"
he told reporters. "Oh, this is beyond anything that we've seen. So we must prepare for everything. And the only way
you do that is that you take a cold, steely, hard look at it and get ready."
He refused to rule out the possibility of air strikes against ISIS targets in Syria.
Broad-based approach
At the same time, Hagel and Dempsey emphasized that defeating ISIS requires a broad-based approach that
includes diplomacy to forge an international coalition and better governance in Iraq and Syria to build public
opposition to the extremists.
"Political reform will make it harder for (ISIS) to exploit sectarian divisions," Hagel said. "The United States and the
international community will increase support for Iraq in tandem with political progress."

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

38

US Leadership Good -- Terrorism


Hegemony necessary to prevent terrorism
Monterey County Herald, 8-19 (California), August 19, 2014 Editorial: Panetta: No time for isolationism
The bad actors, the failing states aren't going away.
In fact, says Leon Panetta, former Obama administration secretary of defense and CIA chief, global threats to U.S.
security today are extensive and expanding. In other words, said Panetta in a wide-ranging address Tuesday to a new
crop of congressional interns at CSU Monterey Bay's Panetta Institute, this is no time for a return to isolationism.
In his three-hour dissertation on U.S. foreign policy and the instruments of government that carry it out, Panetta took
students through more than two centuries of how the country has fared in trying not to become "trapped" by global
issues and conflicts. Ultimately, the United States has had to take on a greater global role.
The lessons of the past should not be forgotten, Panetta argued, as the U.S. has cycled through periods of global
involvement followed by isolationism that inevitably ended as new conflicts arose.
This was true in before and after World War I, and helped lead to the cataclysm of World War II, where the U.S. finally
was drawn in by the shattering attack at Pearl Harbor.
The rise of the Soviet Union after World War II forced the U.S. into the role of leader of the free world. Continuing
wars Korea, Vietnam, the Persian Gulf, the post-9-11 war on terrorism have subsequently shown, said Panetta, that
if "the United States doesn't provide leadership, nobody else will."
And that can be seen today with the newest terrorist organization, known as ISIS, which came together in the Syrian
civil war and is threatening to overrun Iraq.
"We have to exert global leadership," said Panetta, in a world intertwined by trade and communications.
Without overtly criticizing the current mood in this country, or the policies of President Barack Obama, Panetta
outlined a sobering and fearsome witch's brew of trouble spots:
1. The U.S. remains at war in Afghanistan with the Taliban. Will we retain a presence there, even as the political will to
pull out seems pervasive? Panetta said the U.S. needs to keep assisting Afghan security forces.
2. Terrorism. How do we confront people who want to kill us? Panetta said that post-911 policies and actions taken by
the U.S. have prevented another massive domestic terror attack and that covert actions taken in Pakistan helped
dismantle the leadership of al Qaeda.
But, terrorism has "metastasized" into the newest threats, including ISIS, which wants to establish an Islamic
caliphate as a staging ground for future attacks on the U.S., said Panetta. The militants were aided by sectarianism in
Iraq promoted in part by former Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. Panetta He said he supports Obama's decision to
start air strikes in northern Iraq against ISIS. Contrary to reports, he noted, the U.S. has reintroduced "boots on the
ground" in Iraq special forces working with Iraqi and Kurdish forces. Unfortunately, ISIS is only one of several
growing terrorist threats in the world, said Panetta, noting threats in Yemen, Somalia and Nigeria.
3. Panetta also looked at the rogue state of North Korea and it's potential threat of mobile ICBMs aimed at U.S.
territory; the continuing concerns Iran will be able to produce nuclear weapons; the chaos and carnage in Syria; the
threats to Israel from Hamas and Hezbollah; and Russia's moves to regain prevailing influence over countries formerly
in the Soviet orbit. Panetta said it's a "very real possibility" Russia will send troops into the Ukraine and that Soviet
strongman Vladimir Putin is "somebody you have to deal with through strength."
As if all this wasn't scary enough, Panetta then noted the attempts to assault U.S. security through cyber terrorism,
with the potential that America's electrical grid, transportation networks and financial systems could be brought
down.
The United States can hardly withdraw from such a toxic storm. Panetta is right that no other country has the will or
the way to fight back. Isolationism won't provide anything but a false sense of security that inevitably will be
shattered.

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

39

Proposals to Fight ISIS in IRaq


US should condition military support for Iraqs Shiite government on the following
Anthony H. Cordesman, 8-4, 14 holds the Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy at the Center for Strategic and
International Studies in Washington, D.C, Iraq: A Time to Act, http://csis.org/publication/iraq-time-act DOA 8-27, 14
Setting the Conditions
First, the United States should openly set clear conditions for its support. It should not blandly act as if the present
Iraqi government had not created the civil war that made the gains of ISIS possible or as if the politics and actions of
Iraqs central government and major factions were not as much of a threat as ISIS.

The United States should actively and openly hold a dialogue with Sunni, Kurdish, and opposition Shiite
figures. It should be clear that the United States does not trust Maliki, wants him gone, and will not take sides
against Sunnis or strengthen Maliki in ways that might threaten the Kurds. If Maliki will not accept this, the
United States should make it clear that he must go or there is no aid.
The United States should actively and openly pressure Iraq to deal with the suspect and abusive elements of
its Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) and intelligence efforts as it did during the Iraq War between 2003 and 2011. It
should publicly identify elements of the ISF that Maliki uses to suppress and abuse Sunnis and build his own
power and make aid conditional on their being excluded.
U.S. advisers should only work with mixed and national elements of the security forcesnot polarized
Sunni or Shiite led forcesand only provide aid within the structure of the professional officers and
commanders that actually serve Iraqs interests rather than those of Maliki or Shiites. The United States
should only provide support of a kind that will assist in the creation of an effective force than serves Iraqs
national, rather than sectarian, interests.
The United States should either publicly report onor leakany action by the Maliki or any successor
government that is corrupt, favors Shiites and pro-Maliki elements of the ISF over the need to defeat ISIS and
bring Sunnis and Kurds back into the government and ISF, and links Maliki to Iran.
The United States should place strict restraints on the use of new arms deliveries to prevent them from being
used against Sunni or Kurdish populations in ways that solely serve Malikis interests and exacerbate the civil
war.
The United States should restrict any use of U.S. airpower and intelligence data to targets that are clearly
linked to the Islamic State or other extremist movements. It should shape its strategic communications to
make it clear to all Iraqis and all those in the region that Iranian and Russian arms, advisers, and volunteers
are being used in ways that do not serve the interests of all Iraqis.
The United States should more openly and separately reach out to Sunni tribal and other leaders to
encourage them to resist the Islamic State. It should back the Kurds in creating an expanded security zone
and energy exports through Turkey as a counterweight to Maliki, Islamic extremists, and Iran.
The United States should reach out to the full range of moderate Shiite leaders to seek support for a united
and truly national government. It should also both highlight abuses of Sunnis by Shiite militias and consider
offering covert or overt support and training to militias that are tied to Shiite leaders who seek to rebuild
Iraq on a national level (like Ali al-Sistani).

The US should provide military assistance in Iraq


Anthony H. Cordesman, 8-4, 14 holds the Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy at the Center for Strategic and
International Studies in Washington, D.C, Iraq: A Time to Act, http://csis.org/publication/iraq-time-act DOA 8-27, 14

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

40

The United States needs to act now to create a stronger military advisory effort and work with Iraq to selectively rush
U.S. foreign military sales (FMS) deliveries. This effort should involve the following actions:

The United States should provide more advisory teams, including teams in the field, where this can already
mean supporting the rebuilding of all the elements of the Iraqi Security Forces along professional and
national lines. It should, however, be careful not to repeat its past mistakes in doing this the U.S. way, rather
than the Iraqi way.
As part of this stronger training and advisory effort, it should explore the option of deploying Special Forces
quietly in the field to provide operational support, tactical intelligence, and the carefully targeted flow of aid.
The United States should expedite new arms deliveries, seeking congressional approval of fast tracking and
allocation of assets in U.S. forces where necessary. It should rush the supply of weapons and material to the
ISF that will allow them to defeat ISIS and other Sunni factions, including attack helicopters.
The United States should begin to use airpower from nearby bases and/or carriers and unmanned aerial
combat vehicles (UCAVs), selectively striking only against clearly defined critical Islamic State and other
extremist military targets.
The United States should tie the targeting of Islamic State and other Sunni extremist targets in Iraq to strikes
that will impact on their strength and capability in Syria. U.S. efforts in Iraq should be linked with efforts to
strengthen pressure on both ISIS and the Assad regime in Syria, treating the operation in Iraq as part of a
broader policy in dealing with Syria-ISIS-Iraq-Iran.
The United States should seek to repeat the effort it made in restructuring the national police. It should work
with the Iraqi government to publicly identify and change the elements of the ISF that Maliki has used to
suppress and abuse Sunnis and to build his own power and work to change their structure, composition, and
commanders. It should persuade a new government that promotions and command positions must be
approved by the entire government, to cease temporary command positions and other ways of linking
command to the prime minister, and to create a national force based on merit.
The U.S. advisory mission should be large enough to help Iraqi forces in the field, and Special Forces and
other expert elements should be deployed to help with targeting and intelligence at a tactical level. The
United States should help Iraqi forces use of U.S. airpower and intelligence data to target the Islamic State
threat on a broad level.
The United States should examining options to increase its civil advisory role in helping Iraq develop effective
governance and development, with the possible option of encouraging a functional form of federalismand
supporting a strong Kurdish region or state if Iraq should actually divide.
The United States should more openly and aggressively reach out to Sunni tribal leaders to encourage them
to resist the Islamic State and actively work to persuade the Kurds to reach a solution with the new
government that will tie the size and nature of their security zone and energy exports through Turkey to the
rebuilding of Iraq as a unified stateencouraging an Iraqi examination of options for federalism in the
process.
The United States should reach out to other Shiite leaders to seek support for a united and truly national
government. It should also both highlight abuses of Sunnis by Shiite militias and consider offering covert or
overt support and training to militias that are tied to Shiite leaders who seek to rebuild Iraq on a national
level.
The United States should work with Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the UAE to try to develop an integrated
approach to dealing with counterterrorism, the Islamist extremist threat in Syria, and the Assad regime. It
should not only encourage strong security ties, but consideration of plans to fully integrate both Jordan and
Iraq into the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC).
In the process, the United States should seek to strengthen support from Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey to
limit the ability of the Islamic State to operate, cut off external sources of income and better seal key borders,
and support and train Iraq forces.
The United States should not try to exclude other countries from playing a role when this is constructive, but
it should openly identify any Iranian and other outside efforts that serve sectarian interests or those of an

Planet Debate 2014


ISIL/Terrorism Update

41

outside power. The United States needs a clear strategic communications plan focused on helping a national
Iraqi government succeed as well as defeating the ISIS threat.
The United States should shape its strategic communications to make it clear to all Iraqis and all those in the
region when Iranian or Russian arms, advisers, and volunteers are being used in ways that do not serve the
interests of all Iraqis.

At every step in this process, the United States should openly make it clear that while it will never commit ground
troops or try to save Iraq from itself if it does not make serious reforms, it will sharply increase its level of assistance if
Iraq does complete the creation of new government without Maliki and without turning to a competing political show
like Ahmed Chalabi.

Вам также может понравиться