Steve: These primitive and dysfunctional societies couldn't succeed in taking over and keeping control of large areas without a steady flow of cash. Not just because terrorism is expensive, but because it is so far removed from any level of productivity that exceeds what existed in the middle ages. They are being funded by piracy out of somalia, poppy fields in Afghanistan, charities that are really fronts for terror organisations, oil fields nationalized by totalitarian regimes, Saudi royal family members, and those nations that fund terrorism. Look at that list again of sources of resources; at least half of it is -from- entities created/maintained by exactly their warlord tactics. I think we understimate the nature of raw megapolitical power. I think we also ignore the Paradox of Violence: that, civilization ultimately defends civilization via the projection of superior violence. It is the nature of power/force; it can't be unilatarally resisted without power/force except by fleeing, or conceding the conflict. In this conflict, it the West with the most to lose by the conflict, and the terrorists with little to lose by the conflict. They are contesting for all of Iraq and some of Syria and much of the Middle East in general. They are adding yet more area under the curve. Tick tock. This splintered amalgam of shitfighters from Hezbollastan (the mess North of Israel that used to be Lebanon before Lebanon was conceded by the free world) to Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and whatever we want to call Iran continues to spread and control more resources exactly as you describe above. Now consider the other half of that list, such as the Saudis; part of that calculus is looking at the behaviour of the West, not finding much credibility, and hedging their bets. Trying to buy favor from the throat slitting warlords running loose in their 'hood, seasoned with just a little resentment for the way they've been treated like well paid lapdogs, not to mention their own religious fanatacism. Looking back there is a very clear pattern: weatherable brief spurts of credible action by the West followed by long unsightly periods of hand-wringing, apology, and propitiation. Somalia so soon after the wake of Gulf War I. We -can't- seriously believe we are establishing credibility with anyone except ourselves via this unsightly parade of on again off agian weaseldom, of service only to our own domestic political optics and campaign speeches. Especially with that culture of hard-asses. In the US, when a pedestrian is hit with an automobile, our tribe rushes in with amubulances and care and bandages and concern. In much of the (poorer) Muslim world -- not the handful of tiny resortlike oil sheikdoms, where the barefoot robed descendents of bedouins are driving 120 mph down highways in the desert in new Mercedes with their feet on the dashboard between jetplane and palace(an actual memory), but the vast dusty streets of filth and hourly violence and brutality, a pedestrian hit with a vehicle is beset upon by the crowd and berated for blocking traffic, dragged to the side of the road from where, if lucky, a family member will eventually scrape them up and slap on some filthy bandages. We don't understand the culture at the other side of this centuries long festering conflict; we can barely believe it even when we witness it. We in the West largely visit 1% of the world -- the safe, westernized resort crust that we call 'overseas.' The balance of it...the 99%... we've conceded to the warlords and shitfighters. We take notice when occassionally the mayhem crosses over into that resort-like 1% of the world, and imagine that standoff between the dark ages and modernity can last forever; that 99% is enough, and we can live in a peaceful modernity singing millionaire John Lennon hits until we are blue in the face without defending freedom. Military action alone may not be sufficient at this point in the conflict, but then again, neither is wishful thinking about spanking a few billionaire Saudi sheiks with a slap on the wrist. What is necessary is, convincing, credible military action, sufficient to convince the shitfighters that the West will credibly defend itself. It is the absence of that which not only encourages them in this conflict, but actually enrages them. (How can -this- weak assed thing barely defending itself be the most powerful nation on earth?) There might have been a theory at one point; the vast sums of wealth poured into the oil nations would somehow spread out and Westernize the dark agers, nudging them slowly into the modern world; pacification via creation of a vast middle class of wealthy enough Muslims who would become fat and happy new consumers and join the party we call modernity. But looking back, I don't think we were particularly concerned with the efficacy of that theory or its implementation; we were OK with creating a tiny handful of immensely wealthy oil sheiks and tyrants presiding over squalor in the former Ottoman colonies. We let unfinished business from WWI and the power vacuum left by the collapse of the Ottoman Empire fester for now a hundred years. A hundred years has not been sufficient for a largely passive and war weary/averse West to clean out this last massive vestige of the dark ages, and its last remnants are not conceding the issue quietly or without an effort consistent with their warrior prophet religious traditions in a conflict with a West led by a nation more interested in the 35% off offers pouring out of Disneyland.
|