America Should Not Make War on ISIS

ISIS is not making war upon America, nor is it a cause of death in America, nor does it have the capability to make war in or on America.

Other countries in the region have more than enough knowledge, resources and capability to deal with ISIS as they see fit. ISIS is not an American problem.

America has indirectly armed ISIS and nurtured its leadership in prisons in Iraq during the Iraq War. Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar also have played a substantial role. Iraq’s new government has made its share of mistakes. But past American meddling and blundering does not mean it now must increase the scale of its meddling by attempting to wipe ISIS out. This will not ensure America’s safety in the long run because, without a fundamental shift to non-intervention by the U.S., jihadists will continue to rise up. Warring in these lands is an endless and futile approach to jihadism. Even the attempt to arm and train local forces has proven counterproductive. Forces have defected to the jihadist cause and failed to fight. American arms have fallen to ISIS.

The goal of U.S. policy is supposed to be to keep Americans safe from death and injury from terrorist attacks here. After 9/11, terrorism deaths in America are understandably regrettable and tragic. But among all causes of death, they are also a very minor cause of death. The goal of safety from terrorist attacks is achievable, without making war on terror.

Between 2002 and 2014, jihadist attacks in America caused 26 deaths:

2014 Washington and New Jersey Killing Spree
4
2014 Oklahoma Beheading
1
2013 Boston Marathon Bombing
4
2009 Little Rock Shooting
1
2009 Fort Hood Shooting
13
2006 Seattle Jewish Federation Shooting
1
2002 Los Angeles Airport Shooting
2

These deaths are an evil, but we also need to recognize that with reasonable precautions and systems and with a non-interventionist foreign policy that avoids making wars on Muslim and other lands, Americans rationally should not fear terrorist attacks and shouldn’t fear for their lives when such attacks occur overseas. The risks of this evil have been low. Politicians who play up such attacks with calls for war are irrational and warmongers. Their calls should be rejected. They should be seen as leaders who are misjudging the situation. This is because there are far more important causes of death in this country than jihadism, which is under control. It is because they are not properly assessing the measures that have in fact kept the risks low, without war. It is because the overseas war-making of the government has by far caused more American deaths in the fighting than terrorists caused here post 9/11. It is because the government has misdirected resources into these wars. It is because the wars actually greatly increased recruitment of jihadists overseas. It is because these wars evilly wrecked whole countries and peoples needlessly and unjustly.

When I say that the risks of dying from a domestic terror attack are very low, it is because there are hugely more significant causes of unnatural deaths in America than the 26 lives lost in jihadist incidents between 2002 and 2014.

In 2013 alone, America had 41,149 suicides. Homicides killed 16,121 Americans. There were 38,851 unintentional poisoning deaths. Motor vehicle accidents caused 33,804 deaths. And the number of people who unintentionally fell to their deaths was 30,208.

In attempting to fight terrorism, American soldiers and contractors died in large numbers:

Operation Enduring Freedom: 2,352 total deaths
Operation Iraqi Freedom: 4,412 total deaths
Operation New Dawn: 66 total deaths

Even deaths by lightning far outpace jihadist killings subsequent to the very large 9/11 death toll of 2,977. Between 2006 and 2012 there were 238 deaths by lightning.

All of this suggests that to make the destruction of ISIS into a priority is wrong. There is no need for it. Terrorism here is under control already. Furthermore, it’s not the role of the U.S. government to eliminate evils in foreign lands, no matter how bad they are. Attempts to do so more than likely make matters worse, as has already occurred. Moral crusades are an excuse for states to make war, in my opinion.

As long as America militarily goes into foreign lands or supports the invasions of others, as in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Libya, Somalia and Syria, jihadists will have a powerful recruiting tool. Under interventionist policies, the odds of large-scale attacks like 9/11 cannot be reduced at their source. Non-intervention is better. It means not using massed military forces or drones or secret assassinations and other CIA schemes. It means replacing these by police work and proper intelligence methods that utilize the public.

Attempts to fight terrorism or terrorist outfits by means of warfare radicalizes a certain number of young men who will join the jihadist cause. At best, if we have endless warfare against terrorists and their organizations, America will always be in a constant state of alert and heavy-handed monitoring of Americans. And this effort will sporadically fail despite the resources devoted to it. This happened in the case of the Paris attacks.

American attacks on foreign lands are not what kept the deaths on domestic soil from jihadist attacks down to 26. The wars didn’t do that. They have increased the jihadist numbers and increased the chances of future more serious death tolls. These wars have caused more jihadist devotees determined to get revenge, to die in a noble cause, and to fill a religious aim. This means a higher terrorist risk for domestic America, and a higher risk caused by U.S. meddling and wars that it initiated.

Standard police work combined with border monitoring and sharing of intelligence with other countries and related measures have probably helped to keep jihadist attacks on America to a low number. These kinds of methods are more effective than making wars. This is a major reason why war on ISIS is unneeded as well as counter-productive.

The Best of Michael S. Rozeff