Maybe ISIS understands the importance of genuine and total commitment better than we in the West do, and intended to do two things here: 1) demonstrate the depth of their commitment, and 2) unmask the lack of such commitment by the West, by challenging us to come get down and get dirty with them directly. This strikes me as totally rational. The are essentially calling a very lame bluff on Obama et al.
The notion of pilots delivering fiery death in a distanced, intellectual, and more palatable way is, of-course, the sort of effete, intellectual approach which is shown for what it is when they do these things in person. As when hacking off someones head, this shows a depth of commitment the West simply lacks, with its pathetic set of transparently commercial/neocolonial motivations.
In any fight, the side that is less committed ultimately caves, or otherwise declares victory and goes home. The biggest thing the US has at stake here is its (rather large and not insignificant) ego. Even if a weakling is restrained by a bouncer, if he's really committed he'll go buy an equalizer with which to return and finish the fight. They'll just keep coming back in some form, as has been pointed out in how ISIS came to be in the first place.
Maybe ISIS understands the importance of genuine and total commitment better than we in the West do, and intended to do two things here: 1) demonstrate the depth of their commitment, and 2) unmask the lack of such commitment by the West, by challenging us to come get down and get dirty with them directly. This strikes me as totally rational. The are essentially calling a very lame bluff on Obama et al.
The notion of pilots delivering fiery death in a distanced, intellectual, and more palatable way is, of-course, the sort of effete, intellectual approach which is shown for what it is when they do these things in person. As when hacking off someones head, this shows a depth of commitment the West simply lacks, with its pathetic set of transparently commercial/neocolonial motivations.
In any fight, the side that is less committed ultimately caves, or otherwise declares victory and goes home. The biggest thing the US has at stake here is its (rather large and not insignificant) ego. Even if a weakling is restrained by a bouncer, if he's really committed he'll go buy an equalizer with which to return and finish the fight. They'll just keep coming back in some form, as has been pointed out in how ISIS came to be in the first place.