Small Wars Journal

How to Put ISIS on the Run

Tue, 12/22/2015 - 11:55am

How to Put ISIS on the Run by Robert H. Scales, National Review

During the last Republican debate, nearly every candidate promised, if elected, to defeat, crush, and destroy ISIS, though none offered any suggestion about how that might be accomplished. Perhaps this newfound bellicosity reflects the growing sentiment among the American people that the ISIS scourge should be confronted decisively even if “boots on the ground” are necessary.

If the United States goes back to the Middle East in force, how will it do so? Certainly no one hears any thoughts on the subject from the active military. Just the mention of a ground plan — or a Plan B, as it’s secretly termed inside the Pentagon — is a sure ticket to Diego Garcia. But as politicians will learn, the gods of war are a perfidious lot. In the end, what soldiers call “ground truth” will prevail over politics, hope, wishful thinking, and the punditry of Republican candidates. If ISIS continues to grow and prosper, and if (God forbid) it continues to kill Westerners in their homelands, then inevitably the call to respond decisively will become too shrill and demanding to ignore…

Read on.

Comments

Warlock

Wed, 12/23/2015 - 11:05am

It's a pleasant fantasy, like a medieval siege. Of course, the cordon will magically filter out the ISIS fighters slipping out of the city with civilian refugees they'll kindly let leave. ISIS will assemble the remaining non-combatants in clearly marked locations for our no-strike lists...and they won't do anything as perfidious as fight from those locations. We'll cleanly shut down ISIS' presence on the Internet without affecting any of the commercial entities they're riding on. The press organizations and NGOs flocking to the spectacle will agree to stay out of the city, or if they insist on entering, absolve us of all responsibility if they should be caught in the bombardment. And of course, those intrepid reporters and NGOs will also make it clear that the suffering over the months is due solely to ISIS's defiance and evil nature.

Maybe we'll replace GP-mediums with colorful tents flying banners, and arrange jousting tournaments between besieging units.

The Israeli operations MG Scales admires so much have been temporary suppression at best. The Israelis are under no illusion about eradicating the Hezbollah or turning them into stateless drifters, even though Gaza is one-fifth the size of Raqqa, and the Hezbollah can't abandon it. ISIS is under no such compulsion -- when they've extracted enough propaganda from the siege of Raqqa, they'll abandon the corpse and re-establish elsewhere. We could accomplish what MG Scales proposes, but it won't be a single siege of several months, after which the locals clean up and we go home to ticker-tape parades. We'd have to repeat this for every city and town under ISIS control. It would not be clean, cheap, or quick, and I'm surprised an officer of his experience and historical knowledge believes any differently.

Wolverine57

Tue, 12/22/2015 - 8:58pm

I like the way General Scales thinks as he would deal with ISIS in Raqqa. It sounds similar to a Vietnam strategy of attrition. We kill until they no longer have the will to fight. Added to the strategy would be aggressive "Search and Destroy Tactics" conducted by air and ground cavalry along with continuous reconnaissance (modern drones). Added to the "Search and Destroy" would be overwhelming "Firepower". Then there would be "Pile On", the Gunfighter Emerson style of Pile On, until a decision is reached. The rules of engagement were in effect in Vietnam, but if the words "US in Contact" came across the air, collateral damage would not over-ride support for a call from GIs on the ground for support. And, we were allowed to shoot first. The GI, who can't or won't shoot first, is at a terrible disadvantage and does not live long. Preemption is a part of our Counter-terrorism definition. It was also acceptable in Vietnam for a US unit to make contact with the enemy and create a separation which allowed for the use of our firepower. We can't replace our fire and maneuver advantage with tactics that resemble police SWAT teams. A GI on the ground will do amazing things if he believes someone has his back.