We can't ignore the atrocities committed by ISIS in Iraq and the West must consider intervening, argues James Snell.
Due to the wonders of the modern age, it is now possible to watch one of the millions of videos pouring out of Iraq as easily as it is to switch on the evening news. I did so this morning. ISIS – the horrific offshoot of Al-Qaeda which is now in de facto possession of much of Iraq and Syria – has certainly been busy in the editing suite.
Unlike the news, however, where films are carefully and conscientiously edited to fit an audiovisual template, there was a sense of real immediacy to proceedings. Shot remarkably well, with techniques almost reminiscent of a low budget reimagining of a Hollywood blockbuster, this particular film depicted savagery of almost indescribable proportions.
All the usual horrors were present, but captured in glorious Technicolor rather than dingy home movie quality. There were drive-by shootings, a token beheading and bombings galore. Rather unsavoury stuff, then, but it did help drive home the point.
These films are made as propaganda, both to extort like-minded would be murderers to sign up, and to warn off potential adversaries.
For me, however, it had the exact opposite effect. I did not feel the urge to fly out to Mosul and begin slaughtering its Shia inhabitants, and nor did I get the message that ISIS were not to be trifled with. Rather, seeing this cruelty unfold on screen solidified my interventionist impulses. For me it became very clear: evil on this scale should not be allowed to continue.
Reports – unconfirmed as yet – hint at the potential scale of these and similar atrocities. ISIS claims to have massacred over 1,700 officers from the Iraqi army. An example of footage of this nature shows an ISIS thug interrogating and taunting his captives. In one of his films he takes immense pleasure in the fact that the man he has just killed was a Shia. Such instances may constitute war crimes in the eyes of the United Nations.
Of course, the rapid territorial expansion of a nakedly brutal Islamist militia ought to worry everyone who knows about it – and the question needs to be asked: what can we, in the west, do to stop this evil.
But it is not being asked, and it would be shouted down if it were. William Hague has already ruled out action in the country, despite the fact that support for intervention is rapidly gaining traction – even from normally anti-war centre-left think tanks, like the Center for American Progress, which this week suggested that the US government should ‘prepare for limited counterterrorism operations against ISIS, including possible air strikes’, in a new report.
The crisis in Iraq is a direct consequence of the disaster which has engulfed Syria for the last three years. In the aftermath of war crimes committed by the Assad regime, including the widespread use of chemical weapons and ‘barrel bombs’, the West at large – unlike me – remained unmoved by the suffering of the Syrian people, despite the fact that their plight was transmitted to millions of TV screens daily and dominated internet news around the clock.
Regardless of that, intervention was spurned by the British and American people, with consistent polls demonstrating a public consensus against the use of military force to alleviate the effects of the awful civil war.
After that, support for more extreme groups, such as ISIS, grew. Pro-Western rebels, such as the fairly moderate FSA, were usurped by assorted Islamists and radicals. Suffering tends to push political opinion towards the fringes, and the Syrian people have suffered more than anyone would wish upon them.
Their plight was caught on a thousand cameras. Heroic citizen journalists documented the effects of airstrikes and chemical attacks.
The world watched, and calmly changed the channel. The direct result of inaction, and inattention, towards the Assad tyranny is the barbarism shaking Iraq to its foundations. Looking away once again, in the face of yet more carnage, would only be deliberately blinkering oneself to realities of this most terrible of realities.
51 Responses to “We should intervene to stop ISIS atrocities in Iraq”
Leon Wolfeson
They are. That’s what’s caused the civil war to drag on, and now ISIL. The gulf states sent Islamists when the West didn’t act. How much more will you let it spread?
Paul J
I don’t think refugees and Islamists are the same. You might re-read my comments.
Assad didn’t start the civil war, by definition. That was the people who took up arms against him. Who were, indeed, fighting for a sectarian, violent, fundamentalist revolution from the beginning.
I don’t support dictators as a matter of course. I am, however, smart enough to learn some lessons from Iraq and Libya. Which you are clearly not.
I can sort of sympathise with the idiocy of the author of this piece-he’s probably got some Soros funded angle going on. We all need to earn a buck after all. A man can fail to learn the simplest of lesson if his financial position is dependent on his not learning it.
Leon Wolfeson
No. I get it, you deny refugees exist (calling them Islamists), as you excuse Assad for starting the civil war. How dare people not roll over and let him die, as you define not allowing yourself to be killed by the government (again) as “a sectarian, violent, fundamentalist revolution”
And ah, you actively AID them as a matter of course, I was being too nice, my bad! YOU need to make a buck off your buddy Assad, as you accuse others of your sins…
Paul J
Where do I deny refugees exist ? When did I identify refugees as Islamists ? What are you on about?
“my bad!” Err, yeah. You clearly have no idea of what the real situation is in Syria. You should stop believing the MSM and their PR flacks for the Syrian rebels.
Leon Wolfeson
Your post. Your post. Your post.
Not recognising sarcasm, check…
So your post is not real, I see. Keep claiming I neeed to believe your Assad-biddy buddy propaganda, and that I need to disbelieve the plain facts of the matter and become a party to a maniac who started a civil war like you..
No, I refuse. I condemn dictators and their allies (that’s you). Along with all the Islamists involved, on both “sides” (of course, far more than two now…we didn’t intervene…isn’t it “great”!)