We can't afford to lose battle against terrorism

Posted Wednesday, February 18, 2015, at 8:33 AM
View 25 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • While boots on the ground may be needed, what will really be needed are actions and behaviors that no one wants to talk about, think about, or even acknowledge that they exist. These actions and behaviors will have to be engaged in by almost every country affected by this philosophy. The discussion will need to be had as to what extremes we are willing to use against our own citizens, both here and abroad. What amount of surveillance against our citizens within our borders are we willing to tolerate. Certain laws will need to be amended or repealed and those in congress must be willing to go on the record as supporting these changes.

    What things am I talking about? Assassinations, cases of massive civilian collateral damage, in other words killing civilians to get to the bad guys. Secret detentions of certain of our citizens. Torture of those citizens and other behaviors in the name of national defense.

    This only a partial list. The rest of the list is so scary I don't even want to think about it.

    One last thing. This will be guerilla warfare and we don't have the best track record against this kind of warfare as witnessed by Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq.

    -- Posted by the old progressive on Wed, Feb 18, 2015, at 12:05 PM
  • OP ......better you than me.......we are already killing people by the hundreds we just don't talk about it.YES......it will be total urban warefare.

    WHAT BOTHERS ME IS WE NEVER PREPARE FOR WAR......you don't gear up hospitals after the fact you do it before the fact.You don't play games with the survivors with YOUR a HERO !!!!!! YOU SHOW THAT APPRECIATION THROUGH PREPERATION AND THE LOGICAL SEQUENCE OF TAKING CARE OF NEEDS.Get ready so that you can focuse your attention on the job at hand other than FDR nobody has done that. WAR any WAR IS DIRTY BUSINESS.....WE ALSO NEED TO MAKE UP OUR MINDS WHO WE ARE GOING TO FIGHT, AFTER ALL WE HAVE A LOT OF OPTIONS !!!!!!!.

    -- Posted by lamont on Wed, Feb 18, 2015, at 12:23 PM
  • *

    I'm going to break one of my own rules by copy/paste an article I very recently read, because there is no way I could have stayed awake long enough to gather the information the author did, nor do I have as much life experience. But seeing it's been re-printed all over the internet, I think the contained information is of high value in relation to this blog post.

    I have literally read thousands of pages of Counter Insurgency (COIN), terrorism, fanatical religious, and guerrilla operations documents. All of it is reactionary information; we've learned what to do after getting our feet wet. The below link is a very good article that explains the history, current status, the fortitude, and possible future plans of IS, therefore giving folks a wider view of what their goals, structure, and motivations are.


    It is a long read indeed, so break it up with some snacks in between. The only thing I wish the author would have done is given it a forward to simplify the dissertation written afterwords. Something like:

    "They're true believers. The worst narcissistic sociopaths imaginable gathered in a sizable corner of the world waiting to cut people up into little pieces. Yes, the worst group of people possibly imaginable. If you want to know more, read the next bagillion following words."

    That would have summed up the article pretty well. But at least the entirety gives a sneak peek into what is going on within the IS structure. The article is also in re-publish on several other sites as well. Our DoD COIN strategists would do well by reading this article.

    The take-away of the article is precisely what this blog post is about, and boots on the ground is exactly what IS is looking to make happen, albeit with a rather kooky end result.

    -- Posted by Darksc8p on Wed, Feb 18, 2015, at 1:39 PM
  • THANKS DARK......I have said that for a year now THEY WANT BOOTS ON THE GROUND.This is a time that we really need to look down the road a long way and be sure we want to take that step !!!!!!!The repercussions in my mind are generational.

    I will probally read it to see what they say about themselves........take care.

    -- Posted by lamont on Wed, Feb 18, 2015, at 2:19 PM
  • I think the writer of this blog jumped to a couple of big very wrong conclusions.

    1. Boots on the ground as an answer to terrorism, considering our previous unsuccessful attempts to meddle in other countries: Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan. This is just plain wrong.

    2. When he says "However, this is something we need to expect of our president -- the ability to put all hesitation aside to make the tough call and send our forces into harm's way once again." The blog author assumed there was hesitation rather than a careful review of the facts and careful, well thought out decision making.

    -- Posted by Sam_1776 on Wed, Feb 18, 2015, at 2:31 PM
  • *

    No problem "lamont". Just have a cup of coffee handy while reading it. It gets a little dry, but the devil is in the details...a little pun there considering the subject matter. :-)

    -- Posted by Darksc8p on Wed, Feb 18, 2015, at 3:24 PM
  • Being retired military I have read more dry garbage than I care to remember........SMILE

    -- Posted by lamont on Wed, Feb 18, 2015, at 4:26 PM
  • Long? Yes. Dry? Maybe. Informative? Very.

    It validates some of my beliefs, and refutes some.

    Engaging and possibly supporting the "quietist Salafis" seems very much like walking through a pit of vipers, one could very well get bit with deadly results.

    It's too bad Mike wont be able to read this article since he doesn't follow links, and CB will dismiss it because of one short passage.

    The one thing in particular that this article validates for me is that you can never eradicate an ideology. At best you can reduce the number of people that adhere to that ideology, thus reducing their large scale threat, but you will forever have to be vigilant.

    -- Posted by the old progressive on Wed, Feb 18, 2015, at 4:49 PM
  • *

    Great piece from The Atlantic. I listened to an interview with the author on NPR last Monday, same subject.

    -- Posted by Dave Thompson on Wed, Feb 18, 2015, at 7:33 PM
  • SO MIKE....there are no parrells to the japanes,none. ISIL IS NOT A NATION STATE.What you are suggesting is that we sacrifice the innocents in order to destroy a group that is spread out ACROSS the Mideast. Correct me if I AM WRONG.

    You know I HAVE NO USE FOR CHICKEN HAWKS SO THEY BETTER GET IT RIGHT.The president doesn't want to put boots on the ground but the politics is really pushing that envelope.I say let the mideast states put the boots on the ground !!!!! That way isil will feel the rath of the people they are trying to subjugate.When they act against there religion they get what is coming to them as what happened with JORDAN.They cannot act outside the quran to other muslims!!!! When they do they set off a fire storm that is not in there best interest.........WE SHALL SEE.!!!!!!

    -- Posted by lamont on Wed, Feb 18, 2015, at 10:34 PM
  • For those that want American "boots on the ground" to fight terrorism, I give you this link.


    -- Posted by Sam_1776 on Thu, Feb 19, 2015, at 5:16 PM
  • -- Posted by Dave Thompson on Thu, Feb 19, 2015, at 7:07 PM
  • Washington (AFP) - The Internet has become a crucial battleground in the fight against jihadist propaganda and Western nations need to step up their game, according to participants in a Washington meeting on countering radical groups.

    Experts say governments must engage in corporate-style marketing if they are to combat the Islamic State, which is using slick videos to lure foreign nationals to the battlefields of Iraq and Syria.

    "If ISIS has a branding and marketing department, where is ours?" said Sasha Havlicek, the founding chief executive officer of the London-based Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD).

    The think tank has carried out several experiments using Google Ideas, Twitter and Facebook to try to directly engage with potential recruits -- and dissuade them from joining the brutal jihadist movement.

    In one campaign, ISD released several videos of Abdullah X -- a fictional character who tries to convince young Muslims that following the Islamic State is not the way forward.

    "We were able to 'hypercharge' that content -- inserting him in the very spaces the extremists were using (...) anchoring this content to extremist Twitter accounts, posting it on extremist pages, having it pop out whenever you search for jihad in Syria," said Havlicek.

    "And within a few months, this went from reaching 50 people to 100,000 people of our target group of individuals searching to go to Syria for jihad," she said.

    The best indicator of success was that ISIS responded by running five pages of "urgent refutation" of the arguments of Abdullah X, she added.

    During the summit, US President Barack Obama urged local communities in America and abroad to take t ...

    The ISD think tank also launched a pilot project using Facebook to "walk back people from the edge" of extremism by proposing a one on-one chat with people expressing interest in violent jihad.

    "Right now, only extremist groups and intelligence services are really engaging with this constituency online," Havlicek said.

    The next step is to see "if see if that outreach can be automated," she added.

    For that to happen, private companies with well-developed online marketing strategies can offer that knowledge to associations and activists working against the IS message, Havlicek said.

    - Counter 'brainwashing' -

    The US government is already working to weaken extremist groups online -- a digital blitz involving a State Department team that posts opinion pieces on radical Islam, cartoons and graphic photos.

    One senior department official told AFP last year that it was akin to guerrilla warfare.

    During the summit, US President Barack Obama urged local communities in America and abroad to take the initiative to protect groups who act in the hopes of "brainwashing young Muslims."

    Sessions on Wednesday highlighted existing anti-extremist programs in Boston, Minneapolis-Saint Paul and greater Los Angeles, which involve community policing and other tactics.

    The US State Department announced the appointment of a special counter-terrorism communications coordinator, Rashad Hussain, but it was unclear what concrete outcomes there would be.

    It is also going to help students around the world to develop digital content that counters the extremist message.

    Peter Neumann, the director of the International Centre for the Study of Radicalization, says while everyone done so far to counter extremist groups is "great," it's "only a drop in the ocean."

    He said there has been much talk about removing extremist content from the Internet altogether, but that is not a fail-safe solution.


    -- Posted by the old progressive on Thu, Feb 19, 2015, at 7:08 PM
  • I enjoyed your link from theonion Dave.

    T.O.P. I don't think that the United States should involve itself in counter propaganda, and I don't think that we can be that effective in using this. The same thing with trying to remove extremist content from the Internet. Who decides what is extreme? I realize that is a simplistic response but I just don't see that working.

    -- Posted by Sam_1776 on Fri, Feb 20, 2015, at 10:00 AM
  • Keep in mind that the French have a justice system that assumes you are guilty until proven innocent.

    The question is, will actions like this work or even be feasible under our system that assumes innocent until proved guilty?

    Paris (AFP) - Six French citizens have had their passports confiscated and 40 more will be banned from leaving the country after allegedly planning to travel to Syria and Iraq, Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve said Monday.

    Related Stories

    French police detain six in new 'anti-terror' raid AFP

    Gunmen fire on Marseille police as PM Valls visits city Reuters

    Jihadists in Libya 'direct threat' to Europe: French PM AFP

    Dozens of Christian tombs damaged in northern France: minister Reuters

    France will stay on high alert after Copenhagen attacks: PM Reuters

    It is the first time the measure has been used in France following its introduction as part of a raft of new counter-terrorism laws in November.

    "If French people go commit attacks in Iraq or in Syria, on their return they will present an even greater danger of carrying out large-scale terrorist attacks on the national territory," Cazeneuve told reporters.

    "There are currently six administrative bans on leaving the country that have already been signed, and around 40 that are being prepared," he added.

    A security source earlier said the six French were "imminently" about to travel to Syria.

    Their passports and identity cards have been confiscated for six months, after which the order can be renewed.

    Cazeneuve highlighted his ministry's efforts to set up a warning system through which friends and family can alert authorities about potential jihadist cases.

    He said the ministry had been alerted to over 1,000 cases and that "several dozen" planned trips to Syria and Iraq had been prevented as a result.

    Cazeneuve has also been in California in recent days, meeting with major internet firms in a bid to improve information-sharing about online jihadist networks.

    They are due to meet again in Paris in early April, he said.

    Some 1,400 people living in France have either joined the jihadist cause in Syria and Iraq or are planning to do so, Prime Minister Manuel Valls said last month.


    -- Posted by the old progressive on Mon, Feb 23, 2015, at 7:54 AM
  • T.O.P. are you advocating doing what the French do to fight terrorism?

    -- Posted by Sam_1776 on Wed, Feb 25, 2015, at 6:07 PM
  • OP .......IS there any talk of using key words to try and eliminate the internet stuff???? I really don't see how that would work in America.The French have amore restrictive society in some respects it might work for them.They also have a very large immergrent population from the Mideast.That goes back to there colonial days and into the 20th century.There tactics could be interesting......later

    -- Posted by lamont on Wed, Feb 25, 2015, at 7:45 PM
  • Sam, no I'm not. I posted that article to go hand in hand with my very 1st post on this blog. One of the things I didn't even want to think about.

    lamont, I would never advocate censorship on the internet or anywhere else. That is a slippery slope that would not end well. The idea of using the internet to try and counter ISIS's wide spread use of social media seems reasonable. Try and provide an alternative to those who seem to be attracted to whatever ISIS is offering.

    Sadly, I do expect to see proposals similar to what is being done in France being offered here by certain fringe political groups using the argument that those affected aren't REAL American citizens. Very sad indeed.

    On a side note, I really wish certain individuals would quit trying to run blogs off the tracks by continually posting off topic remarks.

    -- Posted by the old progressive on Thu, Feb 26, 2015, at 9:14 AM
  • That's good to hear, T.O.P. Ditto on your last sentence.

    -- Posted by Sam_1776 on Thu, Feb 26, 2015, at 9:54 AM
  • This another very long article that is well worth the read. Once again it reports actions that fall within the fears of my first post, as well as some interesting insight regarding some muslims views of ISIS.


    -- Posted by the old progressive on Thu, Feb 26, 2015, at 11:53 AM
  • This article explains why we can't put boots on the ground as advocated by some.


    -- Posted by the old progressive on Thu, Feb 26, 2015, at 12:04 PM
  • Trudy don't let him pull you off topic. That is his goal to stop real discussion on political issues.

    -- Posted by Geordey on Thu, Feb 26, 2015, at 11:15 PM
  • OP.........Read the article on boots on the ground.What struck me was this is something that has to have been discussed before.One of the things that has us back in the area is that we put boots on the ground before.This has got to be fought by the people in the area,more for religious reasons than anything.I thought it very significant that they went after the koptic Christians to the extent they did.By making this a religious war they can make there recruiting pitch even more relevant.It was not in there best interest politicaly to have executed that Jordanian pilot the way they did.The christians were used to try and overshadow that event,it may have worked in the western world but I don't think it did in the Mideast.They will pay a dear price.We definetly do not need to put American troops in any larg number on the ground and even advisors is a slippery slope........ALA VIETNAM.... I say let the chickenhawks fight it starting with CHANEY.....LATER

    -- Posted by lamont on Fri, Feb 27, 2015, at 8:39 PM
  • ISIS wants us to put boots on the ground and they want Obama to say "Islamic Terrorists" because they want this to be their rallying cry.

    Like you said lamont, boots on the ground, when it is far from our country and we have no big stake in it just doesn't work.

    -- Posted by Sam_1776 on Fri, Feb 27, 2015, at 9:18 PM
  • Thank you Trudy. I enjoyed very much your comments.

    -- Posted by Sam_1776 on Sat, Feb 28, 2015, at 12:55 AM
Respond to this blog

Posting a comment requires free registration: