巴黎恐怖袭击已经结出苦果。 一些想成为总统的候选人在对待“靴子”踩在地面上的美国士兵的生命上表现得多么不负责任，而另一些候选人则提议关闭美国的清真寺，建立拘留营，扩大“仇恨犯罪” ”立法，建立穆斯林政府数据库，发放穆斯林身份证，并提高政府监视所有公民的能力。 欧洲和美国也有人呼吁阻止来自中东的难民入境，并提议只接纳基督徒。 共和党总统候选人本·卡森 (Ben Carson) 称叙利亚难民为“疯狗”，一位德克萨斯州政客则将他们描述为响尾蛇。 希拉里·克林顿(Hillary Clinton)的最高财政支持者以色列海姆·萨班(Haim Saban)呼吁对美国的穆斯林进行“更多审查”。 中央情报局局长 正在警告 更多的伊斯兰国恐怖袭击正在“酝酿之中”，这可能是真的，也可能不是真的，因为约翰·布伦南过去肯定对我们撒过谎，而且将来可能还会继续这样做。 联邦调查局 (FBI) 詹姆斯·科米 (James Comey) 显然反驳了他的说法，后者声称目前没有任何证据表明存在任何恐怖阴谋。

通常的不干预主义者人群 由...领着 罗恩·保罗和不在我后院的人 自由主义权威人士 认为，由于美国对中东的介入迄今为止一直是一场灾难，因此不可能重复失败的政策。 他们指出，新保守派的主要议程是代表以色列对穆斯林政府进行政权更迭，他们正在呼唤战争，如果他们站在一边，那么我们其他人就应该站在另一边。 在周日早间谈话节目中看到比尔·克里斯托（Bill Kristol）带着他的柴郡猫咧着嘴笑呼吁发动更多战争后，我不得不承认批评者是有道理的。

事实上，乔治·W·布什和巴拉克·奥巴马的外交政策都是灾难性的，但这并不一定意味着这一次不应该重新思考伊斯兰国的持续存在对地区和世界意味着什么。 。 即使是新保守派，如果人们忽视他或她的动机，偶尔也可能是对的。 上周二的 “华盛顿邮报” 新保守主义主导的舆论页面上的主要社论正确地指出，在愚蠢地主张优先驱逐叙利亚总统巴沙尔·阿萨德之前，当前的渐进主义和全面入侵之间存在许多“选择”。

并非巧合的是，这个公式正是以色列政府所希望的，并且准确地表明了新保守派的问题所在。 即使他们得到了近乎正确的意识形态，而以色列压倒了所有其他考虑因素，他们最终也会得到错误的答案。 以色列总理本杰明·内塔尼亚胡无疑对巴黎袭击感到高兴，就像他在 9/11 事件后一样，因为这让西方列强对伊斯兰发动战争，并掩盖了以色列对巴勒斯坦人的持续虐待，他带头真正相信尽管伊斯兰国所带来的威胁要大得多，但铲除阿萨德仍然是当务之急。

但首先，我们应该简短地审视一下 ISIS 为何与众不同。 伊斯兰国可以说是美国在入侵伊拉克后允许在中东发展的权力真空的产物，然后采取措施破坏叙利亚政府的稳定。 承认这一点，不干预主义者提出的不进一步干涉该地区的论点具有一定的说服力，但必须考虑伊斯兰国所代表的实际威胁，而不要陷入可能存在的威胁。

有人指出，如果没有巴黎的袭击，就不会有全世界对伊斯兰国的愤怒。 这是正确的，因为西方媒体及其本土同情心不可避免地在世界舞台上占据主导地位。 然而，伊斯兰国的绝大多数受害者是穆斯林，其中近八十人在巴黎会议前两天黎巴嫩和伊拉克的爆炸事件中丧生，另有数千名伊拉克人和叙利亚人被处决并埋在万人坑中。 还有俄罗斯客机坠毁事件，造成的死亡人数几乎是法国死亡人数的两倍。 此举几乎没有表达出任何团结，这又是对西方媒体主导地位的致敬，西方媒体将俄罗斯视为贱民，几乎不关心死去的穆斯林。

针对采取措施将伊斯兰国从其在叙利亚和伊拉克的“哈里发国”中驱逐出去的反对意见分为两类。 一是美国或北约领导的（相当于同一件事）的努力将代价高昂且没有结果，而在没有真正的美国利益受到威胁的情况下，其取得真正成功的机会可能被认为是值得商榷的。 其次是发生反击的可能性，即外国军队进入叙利亚和伊拉克领土只会进一步破坏该地区的稳定。 同样，如果以什叶派为主的军事力量（伊朗、黎巴嫩和伊拉克）参与其中，那只会导致更多的宗派冲突，因为伊斯兰国是逊尼派运动。 这两种反对意见都表明，无论如何，来自中东的恐怖主义将继续存在，而西方支持的新的对阿拉伯中心地带的入侵将激励许多原本不坚定的穆斯林支持伊斯兰国，因为它将被视为伊斯兰对敌对欧洲人的正义抵抗和美国人。

让我们承认恐怖主义不会消失。 它是弱者的武器，被剥夺了对抗强者的权利，并且至少在名义上处于控制地位，因此它将永远伴随着我们。 无论如何，即使在警察国家，任何社会的完全安全也是不可能的。 如果伊斯兰国被击败并被剥夺了某种家园，它就会分散并通过特许经营权运作，就像基地组织在美军和北方联盟征服阿富汗后所做的那样，而助长中东恐怖主义的根本原因是彻底粉碎由于华盛顿和以色列发起的战争，整个地区的国家权力不会很快消失。

So if U.S. intervention in the Middle East and south Asia has proven catastrophic and terrorism will not be ended why is it different this time? It is different because ISIS can no longer be contained. It has been able to elevate its game, shifting from a regional source of disorder to a genuine international threat able to send cadres of terrorists into Europe and force hundreds of thousands of refugees to flee their homes. This is not to say that ISIS is able to overthrow any western government, but its ability to mount terrorist attacks worldwide including a capability to bring down airliners and stage simultaneous multiple attacks on a city with sophisticated security thousands of miles away has been a game changer. And it has been able to take advantage of a migrant and refugee crisis that it helped create to distribute its supporters all over Europe and presumably elsewhere, including the United States. Indeed, though the U.S. is a more difficult target than France for a number of reasons, i.e. no land border with the Middle East and a relatively assimilated Muslim population, as a former intelligence officer I well understand that no target is impossible. Far from it. Recent news reports tell of 逮捕 of five Syrians in Honduras seeking to travel to the United States on stolen Greek passports. And there is a considerable advantage once a would-be terrorist gets inside the U.S. in that it is easy to get hold of weapons and ammunition while soft targets that consist of large numbers of civilians can be found anywhere.

So I consider ISIS to be a genuine threat that must somehow again be contained or even pushed back because removing the group from its occupied territory and forcing it to go on the run will cut it off from its funding and ability to attract and train recruits. It will complicate how it communicates and will disrupt or possibly even destroy its ability to act internationally. But at the same time I accept the arguments being made against any kind of European or American intervention to accomplish that end, which means that the best strategy is to assist local actors with some actual skin in the game to do the pushing with logistical and intelligence assistance as well as air support from the western powers and Russia. Deploying U.S. military forward observers to maximize the efficiency of the airpower already in place would be risky for those involved but would have a considerable impact.

Tightening the ring around ISIS means including all the local players without exception – Syria, Lebanon, Hezbollah, Iran, Turkey, Egypt, Jordan and Iraq as well as Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States. If the Sunni states can pull together a reliable ground force to do the job, so much the better but the objective would be to put unrelenting pressure on ISIS to hasten its eventual demise. It could and probably should all be accomplished under the aegis of the United Nations, which certainly has the authority to sanction a group that has carved out an illegal entity from two existing states, that has carried out numerous war crimes and atrocities, and that is engaged in downing airliners and attacking civilians. A U.N. imprimatur would also authorize the military action against ISIS that the United States has already been undertaking illegally.

Syrian and Iraqi sovereignty must be restored as a 必要条件 once ISIS is expelled since the pervasive instability of the region has derived from a lack of legitimate government authority. And a negotiated settlement for Syria that will eventually ease the departure of al-Assad within a stable framework is essential, possibly godfathered by the Russians. Meanwhile the countries sitting on the fence or openly financing and egging ISIS on – which means the Saudis, some Gulf States and Israel – should be made to understand the folly of their current policies. They should be pressured either to keep out of the conflict or finally recognize where their real interests lie. At a minimum, their hypocrisy and inhumanity should be exposed.

I write all of the above as a committed anti-interventionist who otherwise believes that the last really good war the United States has fought ended in 1781 at Yorktown. In my opinion that would still be the case but for the fact that ISIS, cult-like and apocalyptic, has changed the paradigm for terrorism, genuinely putting the “terror” back into it. Even al-Qaeda did not line up hundreds of prisoners and execute them, did not burn people alive and do beheadings. It did not kill seventy helpless Yazidi older women before dumping them in a mass grave because they were “useless” while taking the younger women with them to serve as sex slaves. I do believe ISIS to be both an abomination and a global menace that all nations should unite to suppress. If we do not do something now, the threat will not go away, it will only get worse and many more Americans, Europeans and Arabs will inevitably die as a result.