Baghdadi's death: More details emerge from US raid

[Dill]

(10-28-2019, 10:30 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: All of that being said, does this mean IS weakens, or becomes more dangerous? Now there are ~15k fighters scattered in different parts of the globe with no central leader (that I know of, anyway). Do they put down their arms and slip back into society, or do they form in more locally focused organizations and we will now have dozens of different terrorist groups to deal with? That's left to be seen, but the death of Baghdadi is still a good thing.

As to how it was carried out, not notifying the Gang of Eight is concerning to me. I'm not saying that Trump did wrong in this--I don't know the actual rules/policies with this--but it signals an issue with cooperation between the branches. I'm curious if Republican leadership was left completely in the dark as well. It is also my understanding that this was a joint effort with Kurdish fighters, so it just reminds me how sad it is to me that we are abandoning them.

My thoughts on two points here:

1. The reason ISIS was so well organized was because its command structure was composed largely of ex-Saddam officers who knew how to set up and operate modern military bureaucracy. If enough of that group remains at large, or enough trained in its workings, then it is hard not to see either the old ISIS return or a new incarnation of it, possibly under a new name.  But not nearly as powerful or influential. Weaker than Al Nusra, if the 9,000 or so fighters currently in custody don't go free. They won't have armor and artillery any more, which was crucial to their ability to take and hold territory before.

Baghdadi's death will have some immediate impact on how well ISIS will reconstitute in Syria in the current apparent vacuum appearing south of the Turkish safe zone.  By that I mean there may be some struggle among the remaining leadership for the top spot. He had a line of succession six deep, last year, but who knows how many of those are still alive. And they have learned how to function/fight in decentralized fashion. That tends to produce new charismatic leaders.

Whether the original group returns, or returns in strength, its most worrisome legacy is that it established a model which continues to be replicated in Africa and central Asia.  It's media savy was instrumental in inspiring "martyrs" in North America and Europe, but the "franchises" like Boko Haram have not had that success. It's not clear whether that can work again.

2. As far as notifying the gang of eight, I agree with your comments. Were Trump introducing new forces into Syria that would be a problem. Right now I don't see any legal violation. Doesn't fall under the War Powers Act.

HOWEVER, if he wanted to work with Congress better in the future, that would have been a good thing to do. The government is leaking now precisely because the top dog is erratic and breaking laws which concern his staff and cabinet. The refusal to inform just looks like more pique. His personal anger and pettiness dominate national governance.

Trump made a BIG show of thanking Turkey and Russia, who were impediments to the kill operation, with a barely audible shout out to the Kurds who were our real eyes and ears in the region in the months leading up to the attack. Even those who don't much care if the Kurds bled for us (cuz we paid them, right?) should see that so unnecessarily alienating them can't bode well for consistent policy, for possible future needs. "Leadership" without judgment.