No formal plan to fight ISIS at NATO summit


From the Washington Examiner (note to the mod: this is the newspaper the Washington Examiner, not the blog aggregation site, the Examiner):

Confronting the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria is quickly pushing other issues aside to become priority No. 1 at the NATO summit in Wales this week, but that doesn’t mean the U.S. and its allies will emerge with a clear plan of attack in Syria.

President Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron discussed the ISIS threat Thursday during a car ride to a school in Newport and later with King Abdullah of Jordan.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and Secretary of State John Kerry made similar appeals for help from their defense and diplomatic counterparts in Britain, Australia and elsewhere.

“They made clear our commitment to working together as allies to confront this threat, and we’re discussing the range of ways in which different countries can contribute to an effort to confront the threat from [ISIS]…to degrade and ultimately defeat that organization,” deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes told reporters Thursday.

So far, aside from a joint open op-ed from Obama and Cameron making clear their commitment to work together to fight ISIS, after the first day of the summit there appears to be no formal declaration or international agreement in the works.

I think the biggest thing is that this is, at its core, a religious war that has been declared upon the formerly Christian West (as well as upon any other religion than their specific interpretation of Islam).

[caveat: I am NOT making a claim whether the theology of ISIS is “authentic Islam” or whether it is a perversion of Islam…I am not qualified to make that statement one way or the other]

The formerly Christian West, being formerly Christian, is utterly incapable of comprehending their enemy and therefore is incapable of formulating a strategy.

Don’t look for any kind of Battle of Lepanto here, folks. That would require the political leaders of the West to actually acknowledge the Kingship of Christ and the Queenship of His Blessed Mother.


Well, I agree, we are slightly confused about the absolute primacy of Jesus Christ in America, its a work in progress and quickly gaining momentum as I see it though. Admittedly it is an issue with those not paying attention.

utterly incapable of comprehending their enemy and therefore is incapable of formulating a strategy.

I don’t know, Isis is a messianic convoluted 7th century take on the Quran. Those were “victories” by Mohammed. So it stands to reason that this heretical aberration in Mohammed’s name needs to be defeated and quickly and repetitively. And this should be the media message, which is “negative”. Inactive, slow timely response isn’t wise imho with weakly televised murders, that isn’t the advised path. We need Congress, it gains public support the correct way, which is at negative 63%, Congress needs to get involved.


Sadly, most of the so-called leaders of the post-Christian West do not have even a fraction of the understanding you’ve expressed above. Nor are they likely to develop such an understanding.


Nice decision. You should not start fight against. ISIS.


Welcome to CAF, Amir.

So is there a particular reason you have for why the West should not respond to ISIS?


Maybe he is pro-Isis? Or maybe he was being sarcastic? We need clarification.

In any event, the fight against Isis has already begun; it is only a matter of having the you-know-whats to finish it. I am disgusted with American leaders who lack the stomach to deal with these wretches harshly enough to dissuade them from fighting against us again.


NATO only cares about establishing geopolitical dominance over its puppet states against Russia. It cares not for actual evil enemies. Putin, is somehow more evil than the terrorists. Then again it is no surprise, since many NATO states helped create IS.


The UN and NATO are useless.


I am not so sure there is no plan. Our Catholic Prime Minister has declared that our fighter fleet is being prepared for an immediate bombing campaign against ISIS as a newly minted member of NATO. US air strikes kill Al shabaab leader Godane in Somalia and the UK is manning up their air-fleet with the commissioning of their new Aircraft carrier. Our leader has no reticence in . stating we are at war with ISIS and has twice landed munitions to arm the Kurds. Our small country could not bare its teeth without implicit US support and air cover for our transports.
So there appears to be growing action and some clear resolve that the west is arming up to destroy this threat to our domestic safety. I am even quietly confident that Obama will actually do something rather than wave his putter around.


28 Nato members are in agreement with the Isis issue, that is the latest news. Obama is on now.

Isis lost favor quickly with the civil world.


Muslim leaders in my area,kerala, say that ISIS is heretic.

If NATO does not fight, we should. Say the prayer that gave us victory in Lepanto.


It’s a shame. I was actually hoping to engage him/her in a discussion on the issue.

Oh, well.


ISIS is, historically anyway, the true face of Islam. They are engaging in jihad in a way that would no doubt make Muhammed proud. They make other Muslims nervous for being so brash and showing their hand. Nevertheless, if you are not part of Dar al-Islam then you are part of Dar al-Harb (the house of war). In Islam, peace will happen when the infidels are subdued. Keep in mind Islam allows lying to further it’s goals (Taqiyya) so one must be careful when taking it’s defenders at their word.

I wouldn’t put too much faith in western leaders either. It seems they fiddle about while Rome burns.


I couldn’t agree more!


I think the countries on the ground fighting ISIS can do the job. NATO should be considered a pariah.

                        The idea that only America and it's allies can solve the world's problems is as common as it is disturbing.


Perhaps thats true, but also true is no-one was coming to help the people on the mountain…no-one. They were left for “dead” by the civil world, remember? No one was coming. Doesn’t say much for the “civil world” imho. Thus if people of good will can come together to resolve difficult issues, I see no issue.


, did you read my previous post?
i have read the Quran, spoken to muslims.

[SIGN] In the Shi’a view, taqiyya is lawful in situations where there is overwhelming danger of loss of life or property and where no danger to religion would occur thereby.[1]

The term taqiyya does not exist in Sunni jurisprudence.[/SIGN]

i disagree


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit