Let’s Do Some Thought Experiments about the Islamic State
“Who you are speaks so loudly I can’t hear what you’re saying.” —Ralph Waldo Emerson
Imagine What You Would Do As Leader of Mujahedin
Imagine that you are the leader of a desert fighting force that commits such unspeakable acts of horror that they are capable of intimidating a military force much larger than they are. Now, imagine that the President of the United States has started sending signals that he plans to bomb your fighting force from the air, but he has promised that he will not challenge your military superiority with American “boots on the ground.”
Scatter Like Roaches When the Light Is Turned On
What would you do, knowing that you will be challenged from the air only, in order to change the odds in your favor? Perhaps you would immediately make a decision to divide your forces into smaller targets. This would, indeed, make it hard for airpower to be effective. An attack force of 1,000 men might be split up into 200 units of five men. Everyone could be ordered to scatter in the desert until a time and date certain, at which point all units would suddenly converge to attack a target.
Such a strategy would mean no large convoys of trucks to attack. No marching columns of troops. No large groups of men or matériel. Trying to bomb such targets would be fruitless. A bomber squadron’s use of huge amounts of ordnance from the air, for a pay-off of only a few units of five or six men per bombing run, would not fare well in any cost-benefit analysis.
Changing the Game
Bomber squadrons could indeed target munition dumps and technology centers on the ground. This model, however, does not take into account that, if you had foreknowledge that this was about to happen, you would likely command your Mujahedin to scatter any munitions from storage in warehouses, so that a new, decentralized model would become de rigueur. Your Mujahedin could also be required to carry more ammo in personal rucksacks. This is like changing the game of Three-Shells-and-a-Pea to a new game with thousands of shells and hundreds of peas, the dilemma being that, before any peas can be discovered, first the shells must be found out.
Headquarters could be moved on a daily basis, and so could military assets, such as tanks and trucks. Many of these could be hidden in population centers, until needed, at which time they could all be deployed to their targets along separate routes, making it difficult to bomb all of them in one place. Only one or two targets at a time could be destroyed. Some targets, of course, cannot be moved, such as oil wells and refineries. This infrastructure can be bombed repeatedly. But, other than hard infrastructure, Islamic-State assets can be mobilized.
The technology war will continue, unabated, for no “technology center,” per se, is really necessary in today’s world. The Islamic State can easily continue its campaign of propaganda, recruitment, and terror on social media. Laptops are small, powerful tools that are easy to transport. You can easily organize your terrorist recruiters into a loosely-knit organization that communicates exclusively by Internet.
Your entire force can be re-imagined to work in a totally disjointed, yet effective, manner, accomplishing all the same goals as before. You could probably dodge bombs from the air without much to fear, and the pledge of “no boots on the ground” from President Obama would be a comfortable assurance that you one day would see all of Iraq and Syria devolve to Islamic-State control.
These kinds of thought experiments are not difficult to engage in, so I cannot imagine for the life of me why we should not suspect that Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi (aka Caliph Ibrahim of the Islamic State) has not used his imagination consistently along these lines. The man is an evil genius, with a PhD in Islamic Studies from the Islamic University of Baghdad.
Obama’s Aiding and Abetting of the Enemy
President Obama has done several things he should not have done, all of which set the stage for the current state of affairs: 1) In the spring of 2009, Obama released Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi from Camp Bucca, a detention facility in Iraq; 2) In 2011, Obama withdrew US troops, without negotiating to leave a residual force (per his toxic promise not to do so); 3) Obama, when warned a year in advance of the Islamic State’s becoming a serious problem, simply ignored advice to address the problem and eventually declared them a “JV team”; 4) Obama pledged not to harm the Islamic State on the ground; 5) Obama opened the US border, using Central American refugees for cover, but what he has really done is to open up access for Islamic-State terrorists to enter the US.
Obama’s Harmful Actions Are All On Purpose
Obama has been hailed as an intellectual hero of the Left. He was the first black editor of the Harvard Law Review. It is impossible that Obama is ignorant of what he is doing and of the likely consequences of his decisions. Military advisors have been telling him all along what the probable outcomes might be of every decision Obama makes as Commander-in-Chief. If Obama were merely making mistakes, he would occasionally get something correct; but everything action he takes is wrong. So he must be acting intentionally.
Obama the Traitor
Obama is fully capable of doing the same thought experiments we just imagined. Obama is also fully aware of how much danger he puts the country in by keeping the border open. Obama knows about the ten Islamic-State terrorists that were apprehended on our border the day before September 11, 2014. Obama knows all of these things. Yet he persists in doing nothing to change this very deadly status quo he has instituted.
Barack Hussein Obama is, quite obviously, the Enemy Within.
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com