What is a winning strategy for defeating ISIS?

LTC Bink Romanick — Wed, 03 Jun 2015 20:34:27 -0400

I have often seen people say "Obama doesn't have a winning strategy for defeating ISIS". I ask you, what is your strategy for defeating ISIS. Not tactics, strategy.

Response by CPT Ahmed Faried made Jun 3 at 2015 8:37 PM

CPT Ahmed Faried — Wed, 03 Jun 2015 20:37:30 -0400

Stop supplying them with weapons by proxy. Get the Iraqis to commit to the fight. Possibly some limited direct engagement ourselves.

Response by TSgt David L. made Jun 3 at 2015 10:31 PM

TSgt David L. — Wed, 03 Jun 2015 22:31:06 -0400

A B-52 loaded with B-61s/83s... Sorry, I don't see another good answer...

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 3 at 2015 11:32 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 03 Jun 2015 23:32:18 -0400

I would begin with an economic line of effort. ISIS raises funds through trafficking in illicit oil and pillaging their conquests. That oil should be pretty easy to interdict going into Turkey, mostly. This'll will mitigate their ability to recruit/train/pay fighters.
Second, I have observed that ISIS is making the same mistake we did in 2003. They are trying to hold vast tracts of land with not enough men and utilizing some very long, very vulnerable lines of communication. That is ripe for harassment style attacks on their logistics trains, further stressing their finances.
Third, we need to hit them where it hurts, their rear areas in Syria. ISIS leaders are getting entirely too comfortable back in their fledgling Caliphate, and some well-aimed shots ought to make them think twice and reduce their will.
Ultimately, you will need to dislodge them from the territory they occupy. For this, a more classical Counter-Insurgency strategy is appropriate, with a lot of partnership with indigenous security forces. We'll need to embed some technical experts in those IA formations to buttress capabilities they don't have, but they need to take point.

When the dust settles, the GoIZ needs to spend real effort to rebuild and deconstruct the social reasons ISIS was able to garner support from the population. That will take a while, and the US should be able to be of assistance in this area.
With time and some good fortune, you should be able to recover to 2011-level security and governing efficacy in a year or two.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 4 at 2015 4:55 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 04 Jun 2015 04:55:47 -0400

The problem lies with the fact that we aren't really fighting an organized militant force, we're battling a radicalized ideology that hates western culture. It's like trying to fight a mythical zombie horde as every confirmed kill we get adds to their numbers because it reinforces their ideals of hate and legitimizes their plight in the minds of borderline individuals.

ISIS is an organization of opportunity that filled the power vacuum left by an ill-advised premature withdraw from a politically unstable region.

How do you effectively fight and combat an idea spreading like wildfire through a geographical region? It's an organic, ever evolving hydra. We cut off the head and two more grow in it's place. Tyranny is a top heavy political structure that eventually collapses under it's overinflated weight, so i think directly fighting it isn't going to be the answer.

The "winning strategy" in my humble opinion, would be to withdraw from the fight, attempt to contain the wildfire from spreading further (e.g. keep them from obtaining WMDs [weaponized plutonium or depleted uranium, etc]) and wait for it to burn out. We must come to grips with the fact that democracy isn't an award that can bestowed upon you [a country], but rather a self-obtained liberty earned with the blood of tyrants and the sacrifice of patriots.

Response by LTC Yinon Weiss made Jun 20 at 2015 8:44 PM

LTC Yinon Weiss — Sat, 20 Jun 2015 20:44:15 -0400

Short of going all-in and sending a million ground troops to the Middle East for the next few years, destroying ISIS has to come through smarter means. Since they don't have access to many resources (besides oil and US military equipment that they capture from Iraq), if we isolate and contain them, their own medieval ideology will only weaken them more and more over time. Without outside support, ISIS will eventually collapse. Keeping them contained and isolated, and letting them rot away will eventually allow them to be overtaken by local forces who are tired of their extremist and self-destructive principles. This is at least a coherent strategy that we can execute on, and should therefore be considered.

I would also suggest considering breaking Iraq up into three countries (Shia, Sunni, and Kurd). A Sunni territory government will finally have the incentive to prevent a new ISIS from forming because it would be a direct threat to the Sunni government, unlike the barely patched together government of Iraq today, which is obviously willing to cede large parts of Iraq as long as Baghdad and the Shia territories are protected.

Response by SSgt Rachel Shelley (Cook) made Jun 20 at 2015 8:50 PM

SSgt Rachel Shelley (Cook) — Sat, 20 Jun 2015 20:50:53 -0400

I suppose that is an easy challenge, Sir, because it obvious that no single person on this website will have an appropriate and rigorous strategy that details our success over ISIS. Although, I do not doubt there will be many good ideas. Does that change the fact that Obama still doesn't have a strategy? It does not. The question then becomes, is anyone with the necessary experience and position suggesting a new one? I do not have this answer. I'd be interested to know. I enjoyed reading the answers your question provoked. v/r - R. C.

Response by LTC Stephen Lee made Jun 7 at 2016 9:39 AM

LTC Stephen Lee — Tue, 07 Jun 2016 09:39:22 -0400

I will not attempt to describe the winning strategy but I will tell you how not to win. You must not: Allow ISIS to sleep in his home bed at night, get up and eat breakfast prepared by his Mom, pick up his rifle cleaned last night by his little brother. Leave his house , reap havoc all day and return home for supper and a good nights sleep in his childhood bed. Repeat next day, ad infinitum.That does not destroy the "will to win" as described in Clausewitz' book on "The Principles of War". Winning war is not an exercise in killing the enemy in ones and twos.You can do that in car accidents. To win wars you must kill the soldier's Mom ,Dad, brothers, sisters, wife children, destroy his house. bomb his town and give him nothing to come home to. You must put him in the position, "he has nothing left to fight with or for"; he must feel alone and that all is lost. That is what is meant by destroying his will to continue to fight. He has nothing to fight for, nothing to gain, no one to strut for, he is a beaten man. He long ago lost the ability to even find anything to rebuild and he certainly does have have the where- with- all to rebuild anything. He is broke, alone, and disillusioned. If the winner has done his job well,the enemy soldier will not even have a flag to remember or salute.