Some people tend to have a very simplified black/white approach to issues, where the fact that a certain person is a monster means that the person needs to be kicked out. So far not a bad thing, but where the seminal mistake kicks in is that these powers-that-be NEVER seem to consider what/who will replace the vacuum.
Thus, a decision is taken to take out Saddam Hussein. A decision is taken to take out Qaddafi. A decision is taken to take out Hosni Mubarak. A decision is taken to take out Assad.
Decisions are taken that are rife with good intention, but unfortunately there is no consideration given to what will replace them. I often use the analogy of taking out the angry dog in your backyard and replacing it with a rabid wolf. Yes, the angry dog needed to leave, but making changes blindly without considering what happens after is ...mildly put ....stupid.
Now, ISIS has become a veritable monster. It is taking over ground in Iraq and Syria. Add to ISIS a resurgent Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. Add to those two Al Qaeda in the Mahgraib and Boko Haram. Add to those four Al Shabaab. Add to those five Al Qaeda in the Philippines (Abu Sayyaf). Then have the radicalized elements in Europe, especially in the United Kingdom. The state of events in Pakistan. The Sword of Damocles that consistently hangs over the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
People think that the Long War on Terror will be long and global, but the ironic thing is that it is only just beginning AND it is not even gone truly global yet.
With that said, I will not be at all surprised to hear the powers-that-be deciding that yet another country will benefit from 'regime change.' There are absolutely no lessons learned when it comes to government.
And the sad thing is that eventually something will have to be done to stop what I call Amalgamated Terror, but because of all the wasted time it will lead to a far greater cost in terms of lost lives and increased monetary cost. If people think the Iraq war was expensive they have no idea how expensive the coming wars will be. Additionally, the enemy has been adapting to the US style of warfare. JDAM attacks will not be as easy as people know what to expect when the congregate, and while the West will always maintain a significant advantage the enemy has been learning. A good example is the attack that Al Baghdadi, the leader of ISIS, did against Abu Ghraib prison - freeing hundreds of prisoners. Not a commando style attack in the style of the SAS/SBS or Delta/DEVGRU, but all the same very different from what jihadis used to do before.
An Africa proverb states that the best time to kill a crocodile is when it is still in its egg. The next best time is when it is a little youngling the length of your finger. But it appears the way some would prefer to take would be to wait until it is an 18 foot leviathan before trying to go to engage it.
When Al Baghdadi says 'see you in New York,' believe him. Whether or not he can achieve it he definitely does intend to do his best. The West needs to reconsider regime change ....unless they also consider who replaces the person they took out. There is also a need to hit these various groups hard ...NOW ...before they get even bigger and start joining. Sure, Boko Haram is currently a Nigeria-centric problem. Abu Sayyaf is only an issue in Indonesia and the Philippines. Al Shabaab in East Africa. ISIS in Syria/Iraq. However, they will get bigger, get richer, join up. They will move from killing Kenyans in malls and Iraqi/Syrian Christians in villages to turning their attention on the US. Many of their plans will not be successful, but the one that will be will make the US take a stand against them ...then.
The problem is that it will have cost more lives and coin that would have been necessary.
What a very good rant :) I agree with you - they don’t seem capable of ruling themselves they need strongmen to rule over them. Supporting stability, in whatever form, is the best thing you can do for them and the rest of the world!
I too have little hope we'll do anything until our backs are against the proverbial wall.
To quote Churchill:
Still, if you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.
My greatest fear is that we never get over our political correctness until we reach Churchill's worse case...
I'll go that one further: Most of our rulers and pundits would, even then, continue to pander to and appease it, hoping it would eat them last.