Eliminating the ISIS Threat
This week our nation marked the 13th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorists attacks. We remember not only the horror of these attacks, but also the heroism, patriotism, and unity of purpose we found as a nation in their aftermath.
This dark date also launched the War on Terror. We learned the painful consequences of allowing enemies of the United States to have safe havens to organize, train, and plot against us. We vowed to never forget this lesson, and to take action against terrorist organizations before they strike again.
These lessons are still relevant and applicable today as the War on Terror continues, and we prepare to address the threat posed by the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). Much like al-Qaeda, and the Taliban who provided them safe haven before 9/11, these terrorists are dedicated to establishing their barbaric and savage views as widely as possible. They use shocking brutality in an attempt to intimidate and suppress opposition.
Aided by the chaos of the Syrian civil war and America’s untimely withdrawal from Iraq, ISIS has been able to seize control of a broad stretch of land in both countries. Alarmingly, they appear to be better organized and financed, and more vicious than al-Qaeda ever was. ISIS also poses a unique threat to the United States because possibly hundreds of their fighters carry European or American passports.
After months of delay and an outpouring of concern by the American people, President Obama has announced his strategy for combatting ISIS. I appreciate the President’s building of a broad international coalition for this effort, and his willingness to use airstrikes to attack ISIS in both Iraq and Syria. Increased efforts to stop the financing of this group and to unravel their network of support are also appropriate.
While I agree with these specific efforts and the goal of eliminating this threat, I do have some concerns about some parts of the strategy. For one, I worry about the President’s request for additional funds from Congress to arm the so-called “moderate” forces in the Syrian opposition to fight both ISIS and the regime of Bashar al-Assad. This may have been appropriate two or three years ago. Now, I fear this action is unlikely to succeed and could have unintended consequences.
The Syrian opposition is a fractured and decentralized group. It would be difficult to know exactly who we are supporting, and we risk these arms ending up in the hands of other extremists – or even ISIS itself. The Syrian civil war is a complicated and brutal conflict in which we should more carefully consider our involvement.
I am encouraged the President now understands the threat posed by ISIS, and I share his commitment to “degrade and destroy” these terrorists. I look forward to learning more specifics about this plan, as well as listening to feedback from Nebraskans before Congress considers authorizing additional funds for expanded military operations.