There has been another beheading, another American journalist killed by ISIS, another message left for President Obama. Steven Sotloff’s death was feared across the globe when he was threatened as the next target in Foley’s death video if U.S. airstrikes continued, and 13 days later, the unfortunate news broke.
One thing is clear, these ISIS cowards cannot fight a conventional war, they stoop to kidnapping, threatening and beheading techniques. To add to the fear, they upload it all to the Internet. A petition on the White House’s website was immediately started to request President Obama do anything and everything to save Sotloff. He was known for his courageous war reporting on various media platforms. Sotloff contributed to “Time” and foreign policy magazines extensively, among others, before he was abducted in Syria in 2012. The way in which journalists are being killed deflates the idea of stopping the on-going U.S. airstrikes that de-stabilize ISIS.
Foley and Sotloff must be remembered as brave men who faced fatal adversaries in the line of duty. The other conclusion we can infer from this is that ISIS is being cornered, targeted and decimated by our brave men in uniform. ISIS chooses to vent its anger on these captive journalists because our Air Force has driven them away multiple times. CNN reported three days ago that U.S. airstrikes helped local Iraqis take back their seized village from ISIS. This is what troubles the militants; they are losing this battle.
We often try to suggest that the U.S. must remain distant and abstain from any military interventions, but in Iraq things are a little different; the need for peace in the region is huge. The government of Iraq has categorically sought our help, and we must do what is needed. An Iraqi student who chose to remain anonymous told me that ISIS has taken over the people’s houses, land and livelihood—he has no way to go back to his country. This U.S. intervention is for these common men, women and children in Iraq who deserve to lead a respectable life.
I agree Obama has not had the best run at foreign policy in his tenure. He has faced criticism for being too hawkish or careless in some cases, but the problem is he is having a hard time deciding what best suits U.S. interests. He lacks a solid strategy for the Middle East.
Peter Beinart of “The Atlantic” would disagree with me. Beinart wrote an article titled, “Actually, Obama Does Have a Strategy in the Middle East,” in it he says Obama has changed.
“When it comes to the Middle East, in other words, Obama is neither a dove nor a hawk. He’s a fierce minimalist. Obama only unsheathes his sword against people he thinks might kill American civilians. (Because ISIS has) threatened terrorism against the U.S., Obama’s gone from dove to hawk,” he said. “The administration is doing all this to prevent ISIS from killing Americans, not to put Syria back together again. Obama’s Mideast strategy is not grand. It’s not inspiring. It’s not idealistic. But it’s what the American people want.”
Currently, Obama has authorized 350 more military personnel to be sent to Iraq to protect our diplomatic facilities in Baghdad.
White House press secretary John Earnest stated on Tuesday, “This action was taken … after an extensive interagency review, and is part of the President’s commitment to protect our personnel and facilities in Iraq as we continue to support the Government of Iraq in its fight against (ISIS). These additional forces will not serve in a combat role.”
Sotloff and Foley are our heroes, and we will always cherish and remember them for the work they did and the values they believed in. But giving ransoms for our hostages will only increase the demands of ISIS. The best way to go about it is what Obama is doing right now, nipping them in the bud.
