Sign In
0 Items (
Search
Comments (9)
At the time of the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, President Bush asked rhetorically if the Iraqi people deserved to be ruled by dictators in perpetuity. Shouldn’t they have the opportunity to embrace democracy and appreciate its benefits, as in the good countries on the planet? Subsequent events proved those liberated from Saddam Hussein unable and unwilling to set aside their tribal hatreds and religious animosities, in effect proving President Bush wrong.
Cut to the current day. Parts of Iraq and Syria are now controlled by ISIS which does the basic functions of a state, including collecting garbage, running schools and hospitals, and so on. ISIS also likes to inflict murder and mayhem on other countries near and far. The state of ISIS runs at a loss so it is kept in business by funding originating in Saudi Arabia and Qatar, and by support from Turkey and the United States.
You read the last bit correctly. ISIS does not grow enough food to keep body and soul together. Starvation is averted by imported grain, supply of which is organised by UN agencies with the full approval of the United States. At the same time the United States is conducting an air campaign against ISIS — but that is more aimed at behaviour modification of the regime, rather than changing facts on the ground. Australia is contributing to this Children’s Crusade-level endeavour, with our aircraft operating under rules of engagement which make them ineffectual.
The recent Islamic mayhem and murder in Paris has generated suggestions that Australia should contribute to a land invasion of ISIs to eliminate the source of the scourge. They would be easy enough to achieve militarily. But what follows? The place would have to be garrisoned. Who would run it? Turkey supports ISIS and would be the source of IEDs planted against Coalition troops, just as Iran was the major source of IEDs in Iraq. Fourteen years after the invation of Afghanistan, the United States cannot completely withdraw from that benighted land. Afghanistan would fall to the Taliban soon after and that would be bad for the narrative the Obama administration tries to put across that everything is just peachy. So the US will remain in Afghanistan until the next president is sworn in on Friday 20th January, 2017. Expect the new president will promptly order a withdrawal. There will be some more American dead in the interim.
The US put some effort into training “good” Syrians to fight the Assad regime. The effort failed completely. Finding “good” Syrians to run a liberated ISIS region will have the same fate. To answer President Bush’s rhetorical question, the problem of the Syrians is intractable and they are irredeemable.
ISIS is the creation of Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, deeply Islamic states that support it as a purer form of their own societies. A benefit for those Sunni countries is that ISIS also breaks the Shiite arc from Iran to Lebanon. The problem with high-purity Islam is that its adherents read the Koran, which exhorts Moslems to attack non-Moslems. What to do therefore? If we are not going to occupy the ISIS region, how should matters be conducted so that the world achieves a state of minimum entropy, with the least number of Westerners attacked by Islamists, troops killed in combat and lowest military expenditures?
Two things must be done for that to be achieved. The first thing to do with errant regimes is to kill the leadership without worrying about civilian casualties. ISIS will keep appointing new leaders, but that doesn’t matter. The important principal to communicate to ISIS is that there is a cost to its behaviour. That also goes for the civilian population that sustains it. Right at the moment winter is coming to Syria. The most cost-effective way of discomforting the ISIS population would be to blow out their windows with thermo-baric bombs. There is a common misconception that ISIS is unwelcome in the land that they rule over. A high proportion of the population, sometimes whole villages, is pro-ISIS.
The second thing that needs to be done is to cut off ISIS’s access to the west, that is people and goods. That can be achieved if there is a will to do so. Those sanctions should also be applied to Turkey which has been supporting ISIS. The effort that Turkey put into shooting down a Russian jet that may have violated Turkish air space for mere seconds is explained by the fact that Turkey would have been miffed that Russia was being effective in attacking ISIS instead of staging a charade like the US-led coalition. The benefit of the Turkish shoot-down is that it provides public clarity to Turkey’s position.
Sanctioning pro-ISIS regimes so that their citizenry are cut off from travel to the West will prepare the civilised world for the next stage. Most of the countries in the Middle East are playing a version of musical chairs, in which their average population doubling time is 27 years and, one day, they will come up against the hard limit of world grain availability. For example, the last time Syria attacked a civilised nation was the Yom Kippur War of 1973, when it joined Egypt in launching a surprise attack on Israel. At the time, Syria had a population of seven million and Egypt 38 million. It was also the last time both countries were able to feed themselves from their own agricultural efforts. Their populations are now 22 million and 83 million respectively, with all the increase in population from 1973 fed with imported grain. Based on animal models of population growth and collapse, the Middle East region is heading for possibly 400 million dead from starvation when the world’s population finally outruns its ability to grow grain. For civilisation to continue in the civilised parts of the world, we have to seal the Middle East off and let nature take its course.
The sooner we start that process, the better. The repeated acts of barbarity in Paris are a good enough excuse.
David Archibald’s most recent book is Australia’s Defence (Connor Court)
Yes, that sounds eminently reasonable but it is absolutely certain that it will not happen. The Middle East is not the only place where countries are hopelessly out of sync. Western countries are just as much at odds with one another, only they are more civilised about it. Besides, it is almost certainly too late to implement the suggested solution. I draw your attention to http://gatesofvienna.net/2015/11/tet-take-two-islams-2016-european-offensive/ a spine-chilling essay by Matthew Bracken.
Bill,
Thanks that was a good read for the most part.
But they fail to mention the preponderance (relative to the percent of the populations in which they reside) of followers or descendants of followers of another branch of the Abrahamic faiths in the international socialist movement, indeed many of its key figures.
I was also disappointed to see that label, “Judeo-Christian morality” used to describe that shared values of traditional European Nationalism. It’s ahistorical at best and propaganda at worst. Frankly it’s as nonsensical as speaking of a shared “Islamo-Christian morality” when trying to create an alliance between Muslims and Christians.
The solution to overpopulation in the ME and Africa — which is under way — is to bring in all their excess (detritus) population to Western Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the USA to replace the evil white populations (particularly the heterosexual males) who refuse to breed docile servants and have for millennia suppressed the minorities of the planet and stole their resources.
But I guess you know that already 😉
DA:
“For civilisation to continue in the civilised parts of the world, we have to seal the Middle East off and let nature take its course.”
How you would seal the ME off from the rest of the world, particularly since it is the source of so much Western oil, is a bit of a mystery and omission here. More detail is in order.
The West will eventually carpet bomb Raqqa, Mosel, Aleppo, and Ryiadh.
Eventually, after that, as the Muslims continue their war against secularism the west will nuke Mecca.k
The west will do as it always does in the face of attacks on its civillians.
Eventually the west will look back to it’s past for a solution to it’s present problem and will see this worked against the Nazis as well as the Militarist Japanese and their God.
When the Muslim populations see the brutality and power of the west they will demand a reevaluation of their religion.
“The West will eventually carpet bomb Raqqa, Mosel, Aleppo, and Ryiadh.”
Are you sure they will be enough?
“Eventually, after that, as the Muslims continue their war against secularism the west will nuke Mecca.”
Jeeeeezis!
“When the Muslim populations see the brutality and power of the west they will demand a reevaluation of their religion.”
Up or down?
😉
I find some of the comments about David’s ‘controversial’ but clearly stated views quite ‘disappointing’. The commenters seem to be able to see the fleas, but not the elephant that David identified. He has stated the unacceptable and should never be allowed into polite company again.
So, let me point out the apparently invisible blindingly obvious point.
1. even small percentages of muslims are able to organise into gangs and threaten all around them;
2. add ideology and the use of violence and they can create ‘no-go’ areas and cut themselves off from their host organism – except of course for Centrelink and services they want.
3. the situation is now so bad in some areas they are almost at the point of taking over. Belgium will be the first country to fall and give the barbarians a firm base. Sweden will follow within five years.
4. Paris, San Bernardino, London, Madrid, Barcelona are just the appetizer and a snack until they go nuclear or biological. Death of the Dhimmi/infidel masses is their aim. Period. Nothing more that that.
5. the earlier we begin to deal ruthlessly with the infection the less we will have to destroy of our own cities to win them back
6. we have to accept that you cannot negotiate with a deadly virus that just wants you dead. You need to excise and kill it.
7. to deal with islam as it needs to be dealt with it is utterly against all the libertarian, liberal and humane basic tenets of our civilised nations. The alternative is our complete annihilation as a society and as living people. They will kill you and your family just as the Nazis killed babies and children. The islamo-fascists are practising their creed right now, while our politicians waffle and demonstrate daily why they are weak and worthless. They are not on the side of our survival.
8. continuing muslim immigration of any kind just adds to the future problem we must face
Got it now?
Watch the following and then show why Nigel Farage is wrong about the largest cultural suicide in world history. We either note the threat, learn to very distastefully deal with it and prepare our children to kill the enemy, or we prepare the boys on how to best bend their heads for a clean beheading and our girls to be slaves.
Nigel Farage: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QH9fvLiGTXI&feature=youtu.be
Where do you want to make a stand? Baghdad or Brisbane? Mosul or Melbourne? Syria or Sydney? Do nothing and you will soon no longer have to choose”
Nigel Farage is one of very few European politicians who have called it right on all the important issues relating to the EU and Britain. By Contrast Cameron has got nearly all of them wrong. The only thing he has got right about the migrant crisis is not to opt into Schengen’s passport free travel and to permit asylum seekers entry into Britain only from the camps in Turkey, Jordan, (and possibly Lebanon, not sure), not migrants already in EU territory.
Because of the referendum campaign on Britain’s membership of the EU he must be very careful what he says about migrants and is quite reticent about the fact that the majority are Muslim. That is a result of the nature of debate in UK which is very quickly diverted onto racism and Islamophobia (an oxymoron, but that’s politics). To optimise his chances of winning his main prize – Brexit – he must avoid such traps. But he still has plenty of ammunition, such as the warning given to Cameron by his Jordanian hosts that approx 5% of the inhabitants of the refugee camps are jihadis, Islamic extremists. That’s tens of thousands of potential and actual terrorists seeking admission to Europe with intent to murder and destroy Western society. By contrast Queen Merkel announced that all comers are welcome and the EU’s official asylum policy, now law, is to include those ‘fleeing poverty’, undefined but could be taken to mean all but the wealthiest 2 or 3% of the source countries.
The EU has now come to Turkey’s aid. The EU will pay it hundreds of millions annually to take back migrants refused a permit to stay in the EU. As part of the deal, Turkish citizens will be given visa free access to the Schengen area (pretty much most of the EU) from January 2016 and Turkey’s membership of the EU will be fast-tracked. Since the UN Convention on Refugees requires the host country to give refugees the same travel rights as its own citizens within three years and many of those in the migrant camps have already lived in Turkey for three years, the deal will give millions of migrants a right to travel to Schengen countries next year – and to take their families. Many will be recycled under the deal with the EU, thus earning Turkey millions to fund its pro-ISIL activities, suppress Kurds and so on.