Donald Trump today called for a "complete shutdown" of Muslim travel to the US. While I can appreciate the emotional appeal of Mr. Trump's statement, it is nevertheless frightening. It is clear that Mr. Trump has no understanding whatsoever of the nature of the conflict or how to combat it. His audience can be forgiven for not understanding the military relevance of such a move. It is not forgivable in a presidential candidate-- It marks him as singularly unqualified to become "Commander-in-Chief."
It is a well know maxim that, in war, one must know one's enemy. It follows from that maxim that one must also know what the enemy's objectives are. Since Mr. Trump's comments play into the hand of he enemy and could very well hand the enemy victory, it is very clear that Mr. Trump doesn't understand the situation. Either he underestimates the threat, or he doesn't understand why it's a threat.
Lets see if we can get to know our enemy a bit better. There are actually several Muslim factions at play here. ISIS is only one of them. None of them, or even all of the radical factions combined, has the military power to stand up to the full might of the US and NATO military might in a conventional war. They all know this. The only way they can defeat us is using guerrilla tactics and terrorism.
They have learned the lesson we should have learned in Vietnam. We lost in Vietnam because we failed to gain the friendship of the Vietnamese, which allowed the north to use guerrilla tactics against us in the areas we, supposedly, controlled. In an ironic twist, Ho Chi Minh learned this tactic from studying George Washington's tactics in the American Revolution. The idea is not to face the opposing army head on, but to nip at its heels, raising the cost of an occupation. Eventually, under such conditions, the bigger, badder army's costs become to great to bear, and they withdraw. Sound familiar?
Using terrorism - striking non-military targets outside of the theater of war - adds to the costs of the war, but it can't ever turn the tide by itself. Terrorism has another objective-- It is designed to eliminate the neutrals, and maybe even turn some enemies into either neutrals or allies. This is where Mr. Trump is going wrong. Way wrong.
Some may remember that the terrorists in Paris were found with either stolen or fake passports that attempted to make them look like Syrian refugees. (Other's might not have seen this.) Why? It wasn't to allow them to move about freely. It was to make us afraid of the refugees. Which in turn leads to us demonizing them, and from there demonizing all Muslims.
The terrorists also know (well, their leaders do anyway) that terrorist attacks result in emotional calls for us to go to war - to take the fight to them. Why would they want to do this?
Why would ISIS want us to demonize all Muslims and at the same time piss us off enough that we'd want to invade Syria?
According to a right wing panelist in a hearing on Benghazi, there are approximately 1.2 Billion Muslims in the world, with about 25% of them "radicalized." That means there are roughly 300 Million radicalized Muslims and about 900 Million that are either neutral or on our side. She used the term "Peaceful Majority." What happens to these 900 Million when we start discriminating against them? Treat them like second class people? Are they going to support our position? Provide us with intel? Fight with us if there's an invasion? Hardly..
And when we treat Muslims badly, it gives the enemy an opportunity to demonize us. "See, they really are the great Satan, like we told you," they'll say.
And what happens with the other already radical factions? Do they sit on the sidelines, or do they band together? I wouldn't put my money on siting on the sidelines.
Pay attention to these numbers. There are 300 Million radicalized Muslims. Right now the US Population is estimated at 326 Million. Of the 326 Million, there are about 1.4 Million active front line personnel, and another 1.1 million reserves. In the whole population, there are about 120 million that would be fit for service. If the same ratios hold for the radicals, we're ahead on manpower, but only a little. Trying to invade and occupy - as Bush tried - would prove to be an expensive proposition even now (as we have seen in Iraq and Afghanistan). What would it be like if they turn some of the 900 Million to their side?
We also need to consider supply lines and air bases, etc. If we lose the good will of Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Bahrain, or Pakistan. Would we be able to base our ships and aircraft in these countries? Even if we could, would they be safe there against radicals in those countries, Or would we have more incidents like USS Cole?
In sum, we need to recognize the enemy's strategy and objectives, and deny those objectives. We do this by continuing to take the moral high ground in how we treat Muslims. The "Golden Rule" applies here.
Oh, and Mr. Trump, you said you didn't understand why the Muslims "hate" us. It is because of the arrogance and stupidity of Americans like you.
It is a well know maxim that, in war, one must know one's enemy. It follows from that maxim that one must also know what the enemy's objectives are. Since Mr. Trump's comments play into the hand of he enemy and could very well hand the enemy victory, it is very clear that Mr. Trump doesn't understand the situation. Either he underestimates the threat, or he doesn't understand why it's a threat.
Lets see if we can get to know our enemy a bit better. There are actually several Muslim factions at play here. ISIS is only one of them. None of them, or even all of the radical factions combined, has the military power to stand up to the full might of the US and NATO military might in a conventional war. They all know this. The only way they can defeat us is using guerrilla tactics and terrorism.
They have learned the lesson we should have learned in Vietnam. We lost in Vietnam because we failed to gain the friendship of the Vietnamese, which allowed the north to use guerrilla tactics against us in the areas we, supposedly, controlled. In an ironic twist, Ho Chi Minh learned this tactic from studying George Washington's tactics in the American Revolution. The idea is not to face the opposing army head on, but to nip at its heels, raising the cost of an occupation. Eventually, under such conditions, the bigger, badder army's costs become to great to bear, and they withdraw. Sound familiar?
Using terrorism - striking non-military targets outside of the theater of war - adds to the costs of the war, but it can't ever turn the tide by itself. Terrorism has another objective-- It is designed to eliminate the neutrals, and maybe even turn some enemies into either neutrals or allies. This is where Mr. Trump is going wrong. Way wrong.
Some may remember that the terrorists in Paris were found with either stolen or fake passports that attempted to make them look like Syrian refugees. (Other's might not have seen this.) Why? It wasn't to allow them to move about freely. It was to make us afraid of the refugees. Which in turn leads to us demonizing them, and from there demonizing all Muslims.
The terrorists also know (well, their leaders do anyway) that terrorist attacks result in emotional calls for us to go to war - to take the fight to them. Why would they want to do this?
Why would ISIS want us to demonize all Muslims and at the same time piss us off enough that we'd want to invade Syria?
According to a right wing panelist in a hearing on Benghazi, there are approximately 1.2 Billion Muslims in the world, with about 25% of them "radicalized." That means there are roughly 300 Million radicalized Muslims and about 900 Million that are either neutral or on our side. She used the term "Peaceful Majority." What happens to these 900 Million when we start discriminating against them? Treat them like second class people? Are they going to support our position? Provide us with intel? Fight with us if there's an invasion? Hardly..
And when we treat Muslims badly, it gives the enemy an opportunity to demonize us. "See, they really are the great Satan, like we told you," they'll say.
And what happens with the other already radical factions? Do they sit on the sidelines, or do they band together? I wouldn't put my money on siting on the sidelines.
Pay attention to these numbers. There are 300 Million radicalized Muslims. Right now the US Population is estimated at 326 Million. Of the 326 Million, there are about 1.4 Million active front line personnel, and another 1.1 million reserves. In the whole population, there are about 120 million that would be fit for service. If the same ratios hold for the radicals, we're ahead on manpower, but only a little. Trying to invade and occupy - as Bush tried - would prove to be an expensive proposition even now (as we have seen in Iraq and Afghanistan). What would it be like if they turn some of the 900 Million to their side?
We also need to consider supply lines and air bases, etc. If we lose the good will of Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Bahrain, or Pakistan. Would we be able to base our ships and aircraft in these countries? Even if we could, would they be safe there against radicals in those countries, Or would we have more incidents like USS Cole?
In sum, we need to recognize the enemy's strategy and objectives, and deny those objectives. We do this by continuing to take the moral high ground in how we treat Muslims. The "Golden Rule" applies here.
Oh, and Mr. Trump, you said you didn't understand why the Muslims "hate" us. It is because of the arrogance and stupidity of Americans like you.
Comments