The Rise of The Islamic State

I had mixed feelings about going into Iraq initially, so I do not pretend as if I could foresee everything that would eventually take place. I do believe that we went into Iraq with a naive and irresponsible plan for reestablishing a new society. At present, however, we can all Monday Morning Quarterback this to death; but what is important is that we begin a dialogue aimed at addressing current and future US foreign policy.

In the following twelve minute video, Ben Swann takes us through several uncomfortable facts about the War in Iraq and its’ consequences as it relates to the rise of The Islamic State. It’s hard to watch because of some of the people he interviews and their organizations lack of institutional credibility, but all the facts are correct and we should force ourselves to deal with them.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Before dismissing the demeanor of this video, consider at least the facts it claims to address and what exactly you think ultimately needs to be done.

So, I agree with about 95% of this, but the real question here, the question this video conveniently avoids, is, is it preferable to install viscous dictators in the Near East to keep the Islamists at bay, as we did after World War II? And if so, can we accept responsibility for the crimes of those dictatorial regimes? Or, do we follow the Obama plan of simply letting the Islamists run wild, forcing ourselves to spend billions helping to defend peaceful Western, Enlightenment-based societies on whose borders these barbarians will inevitably reside? Or, do we simply kill everyone until Political Islam and dictatorial tyranny are impossible? Or, do we do nothing, the libertarian plan, and allow the Islamists to conquer Europe and the Eastern World? None of these options are good.

So who has the better idea?

We Libertarians are remarkably paranoid about addressing political Islam, primarily because we do not like taking seemingly prejudiced religious positions which could be construed as bigotry. However, Political Islam is as much of a threat to Constitutional Libertarianism as Liberalism, Communism, or Socialism – so why are we afraid to address and attack it?

Is it because we cannot choose a policy from the terrible four choices I listed above? Is it because we cannot think of a better solution and are hoping to keep our hands clean of this issue until we find a unicorn juggling rainbows on a flying carpet capable of solving the matrix of the Middle East?

I admit that I don’t know what to do – but I am not a foreign policy wonk. I have an excellent understanding of history, but this understanding precludes the possibility of any conceivable solution which suits my values and principles. Yet, if we do not, as a people, decide what to do, then we are choosing to do nothing and the caustic chaos of the Middle East shall continue bubbling over the edges of the cauldron of the Near East into our world and our streets, and our hesitation and uncertainty will cost lives.

I am looking for 2016 Presidential Candidates to have an answer and a plan on this issue. I suspect this is why Sandy Sanders was excited by the potential Bolton candidacy. I have yet to hear Ted Cruz, Hillary Clinton, Rand Paul, Martin O’Malley, Rick Perry, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, Bernie Sanders, Chris Christie, Elizabeth Warren, or Bobby Jindal offer a solution. There are even bigger issues than the US economy and bureaucracy at stake in 2016. This is a time for serious men and women to address serious issues that will affect the stability of the next century.