What are our goals in Syria?

Jim Geraghty writes today at National Review about what we are doing in Syria.

Here’s a list of what we’re trying to do in Syria:

1. Destroy ISIS.
2. Accelerate the removal of Bashar Assad and his regime.
3. Protect innocent civilians.
4. Minimize infrastructure and environmental damage.

Part of our problem is that these goals, particularly one and two, are contradictory.

ISIS launched an attack in Paris and at least inspiring, if not financing or training, an attack in San Bernardino, California. They want to launch more.

Bashar Assad is a butcher whose regime targets civilians, uses barrel bombs, summarily executes children, tortures foes and reportedly continues to use chemical weapons. He deserves the roughest justice that the United States and its allies, along with karma, can muster.

But, at least for now, he is not attempting to launch attacks against Americans, and ISIS is.

When you have a long and difficult to-do list, you have to prioritize; achieving your top goal sometimes requires putting your lesser priorities on the back burner. Winston Churchill once said, “If Hitler invaded Hell, I would at least make a favorable reference to the Devil in the House of Commons.” If temporarily letting up on Assad’s regime makes life tougher for ISIS -- in a way that is decisive to our effort -- we should pursue that option. We can always go back and find creative ways to make Assad’s life miserable later.


Our Contradictory Goals in Syria

Here’s a list of what we’re trying to do in Syria:

1. Destroy ISIS.
2. Accelerate the removal of Bashar Assad and his regime.
3. Protect innocent civilians.
4. Minimize infrastructure and environmental damage.

Part of our problem is that these goals, particularly one and two, are contradictory.

ISIS launched an attack in Paris and at least inspiring, if not financing or training, an attack in San Bernardino, California. They want to launch more.

Bashar Assad is a butcher whose regime targets civilians, uses barrel bombs, summarily executes children, tortures foes and reportedly continues to use chemical weapons. He deserves the roughest justice that the United States and its allies, along with karma, can muster.

But, at least for now, he is not attempting to launch attacks against Americans, and ISIS is.

When you have a long and difficult to-do list, you have to prioritize; achieving your top goal sometimes requires putting your lesser priorities on the back burner. Winston Churchill once said, “If Hitler invaded Hell, I would at least make a favorable reference to the Devil in the House of Commons.” If temporarily letting up on Assad’s regime makes life tougher for ISIS -- in a way that is decisive to our effort -- we should pursue that option. We can always go back and find creative ways to make Assad’s life miserable later.

In mid-November, U.S. pilots could only destroy 116 ISIS tanker trucks out of 300 parked in one place . . . because they ran out of ammunition.

We also apparently are unwilling to hit ISIS employees:

Warren explained that American officials were deeply worried about harming the truck drivers, who were working for the Islamic State but might not be ISIS themselves. U.S. officials settled on a plan to drop leaflets on the trucks about 45 minutes before the raid, warning the drivers that an attack was coming, while U.S. pilots flew low passes over the area. Planning all that took time.

Read more here.