LET ME BE perfectly clear: Responsibility for ISIS lies entirely with ISIS. Their barbarity and evil are an incarnation of their aberrant and distasteful distortion of religion.
There is, however, a valid and necessary debate over how we should combat ISIS. In December, I introduced a bill to declare war on ISIS. For too long, we have fecklessly approached war without adhering to our constitutional duty for Congress to declare war.
Without question, we must defend ourselves against ISIS, but we must also examine our foreign policy to determine whether it is working.
I disagree with those in both parties who advocate military intervention as the first option to every bad situation confronting the United States. My colleagues who advocate war as the first option are not “internationalists” but “neo-isolationists” whose belief in intervention isolates and cripples any chance of diplomatic engagement. Their prescriptions for aggressive intervention condemn us to repeating our past mistakes.
America shouldn’t fight wars where the best outcome is stalemate. America shouldn’t fight wars when there is no plan for victory. Unfortunately, stalemate seems to be the Obama administration’s strategy when it comes to combatting ISIS.
American military intervention is not a cure-all for our problems abroad. When it comes to using force, we need to be smart and selective. We should only intervene when our vital interests are at stake and when we have thought through the consequences. This was not the case in 2003 when we invaded Iraq, nor in 2011 when we attacked Libya. It was not the case when the Obama administration indiscriminately gave arms to Syrian rebels that wound up with ISIS.Read the rest of the op-ed HERE.
If you like what you see, please "Like" us on Facebook either here or here. Please follow us on Twitter here.
1 comment:
The wisest of them all. The cheese stands alone.
Post a Comment