Intervention in Iraq and Syria a Necessity

In this week’s blog, I will be discussing a recent article written in the Wall Street Journal by syndicated columnist, Bret Stephens. The link to the article is provided at the bottom. On August 25^th of this year, Mr. Stephens published an article about how many politicians are now realizing the necessity of the use of hard power in regards to the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).

            In the article, Mr. Stephens discusses the reason for the rise of ISIL. He does so by quoting a knowledgeable expert on the conflict in Iraq, George Packer. Mr. Packer says about President “Obama withdrew ‘after eight years of war in a way that left the U.S. with almost no influence—but he could have tried to force matters with the Iraqis and left behind far more bitterness.’” I tend to agree with the quote that Mr. Stephens provided. The question of whether I believe in the 2003 Iraq War is not relevant in this case (but as a disclaimer, I believe the Iraq War was horribly managed and led). I do believe though that if the United States left a better impression on Iraq, ISIL would not be in the position of power that they are in now. The Americans left Iraq with an unstable government and a disgruntled population. If the United States still kept a presence in Iraq, ISIL may have been too frightened to commit the atrocities that the world has known them for. Yes, ISIL is still a threat today even with the airstrikes from the allied coalition against ISIL. And I also do take into account that ISIL’s mission is one that they are incredibly passionate about and would not give it up just because of an American presence. However, I do think that it would have been far less severe with a continued American presence in Iraq.

            Later in the article, Mr. Stephens raises several questions. One of these, I think puts the debate about American intervention in a nutshell. He asks, “are we going to fight terrorists over there—or are we going to wait for them to come here?” I believe we should launch a preventive operation in order to ensure there are no attacks on Western soil. The biggest concern for the American government right now should be to make sure there are no attacks on the homeland. Obviously, every politician wants to defeat ISIL. Like almost all issues within our government, the goal is mutually shared, but the strategy to reach that goal is divided. Some politicians are calling for ground troops and a more aggressive attack on ISIL, while others are calling for limited intervention. I believe America needs to defeat ISIL before the situation escalates even more. This will require ground troops and a comprehensive plan to take ISIL out of power. Yes, there will most likely be another extremist terrorist organization that is formed following the destruction of ISIL. But the American government should make sure they take the correct precautions to handle the next conflict. They should learn from the premature withdrawal from Iraq, and make sure they handle the situation with ISIL more efficiently.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/bret-stephens-the-neo-neocons-1409008955