Review of
Instaread Summary of The Field of Fight How We Can Win the Global War Against Radical Islam
and its Allies by Michael T. Flynn with Michael Ledeen
Four out of five stars
Michael Flynn
is a retired U. S. Army Lieutenant General and the former head of the Defense
Intelligence agency. He also spent a great deal of time deployed in Iraq and
Afghanistan, so he has extensive field experience in the Middle East as well as
in a management role. The book is his perspective on how the United States and her
allies should fight against the radical faction of Islam. This is a more
appropriate term, for the violent extremists are but a small faction of the
over one billion people of the Islamic faith.
The key
takeaways deliver a very pessimistic view of the fight against the radical
faction of Islam. The most telling is number three:
“The United States and its Western allies are losing
their global battle against radical Islam.”
We must always keep in mind that the majority of
people killed by ISIS are native to the Middle East, not people from or in
western countries. Religious minorities in the areas controlled by ISIS have
been devastated. Despite ridiculous claims to the contrary, the radical faction
of Islam is no existential threat to the United States or any other western
country.
Key takeaway
number two is one that is a bit disingenuous in statement and explanation. It
is:
“The US government repeatedly neglects to prepare for
the next, inevitable conflict during times of peace.”
While elected
officials and their political appointees create policy and give the orders,
that process does not take place in a vacuum. The military leaders are heavily
involved in driving the creating of policy, so this statement is
self-referential. Furthermore, the history of warfare makes it clear that the
old adage, “Generals are always fighting the last year,” is true.
Key takeaway
eight is a bit unrealistic, simplistic and in ways just plain wrong. It is:
“Iran has been a threat to the United States for
decades through its sponsorship of international terrorism. However, the United
States has prioritized maintaining diplomatic relations with Iran over
international security.”
The first line in the takeaway is: “No American
president has ever stood up to the policies of post-revolutionary Iran.”
In the area of wrong, the United States does not have
diplomatic relations with Iran, they were severed after the fall of the Shah
and never restored. Secondly, the United States was the leader in imposing
crippling international economic sanctions against Iran, these sanctions ultimately
led Iran to negotiate. Finally, Iran is a nation state in a critical area of
the world. No political settlement in Afghanistan, Syria or Iraq can be
implemented without Iranian approval. That is just a fact that necessitates
contact between the governments of the United States and Iran.
While I found
this summary interesting, it is also one-sided and occasionally disingenuous at
best.
This book was made available for free for review
purposes.
No comments:
Post a Comment