Dromi's Ideology

Dromi’s argument that the issue of ISIS can only be resolved through total annihilation is hinged upon three main premises. The first factor in Dromi’s reasoning is that despite similarities between ISIS and piracy in the late 1700’s and early 1800’s there is a stark and critically important difference in their ideologies. Pirates kill for treasure while ISIS kills for God. In Dromi’s view they kill for different reasons so we must find different, and in ISIS’ case, more radical solutions that take this into account. In short, while it may appear that ISIS is similar to other violent groups, it is vital to see the situation with nuance and understand how different ISIS truly is. The next reason he has is that like the Nazis, ISIS must be handed
a total defeat. Dromi’s second premise is based off of the how alike he finds ISIS and the Nazis of mid 20th century Germany to be. He points out that because the ideologies of both groups are largely similar, the strategy that was used to defeat the Nazis would also be the best to defeat ISIS. Finally, Dromi argues that organized assassinations of top ISIS leaders is not enough to ensure the defeat of ISIS and explains the measures he believes must be taken if the annihilation of ISIS is to occur. The measures he recommends are: cooperation between intelligence agencies, depleting ISIS’ financial stability, clearing mosques of inciting Imams, and decisive military action.
Dromi’s first premise exists on the basis that people may see similarities between ISIS and the pirates of antiquity, but that they are not the same kind of enemy. This part of his argument consists of the dependent premise that the remedy for ISIS is different from that which was required for the pirates. This dependant premises is the subconclusion to a few independent premises that state the sole motivation for the pirates was monetary where as the motivation for ISIS is ideological. While I believe the subconclusion Dromi is trying to articulate is actually very important, there are a few problems with his delivery that make his message unclear. Consequently, this part of his argument is fairly mediocre in strength. For an article as short as his is, there is far too much unneeded elaboration into his pirate analogy. The unnecessarily long explanation of pirate history, as interesting as it was, only served to dilute the point he was trying to make. The big issue that undermined the clarity of the premise happened at the very beginning of his work. Dromi opened his article by saying that ISIS and 19th century pirates are similar in the threat they pose to the free world and then went on for two paragraphs letting the readers believe his first premise was going to revolve around that similarity, only to conclude by saying how different the two groups are. This long winded and confusing diatribe may lead some, including myself at first, to believe he was making a false analogy and a poor argument. However, despite the substandard communication, he was trying to show that such an analogy actually is flawed which served to strengthen his premise that ISIS and the pirates cannot be defeated in the same way and that we must draw on a different kind of experience.
Dromi argues next that the Nazis of WW2 are the enemy we should compare ISIS to if we want to be successful in our efforts against them.
This argument consisted of a dependent premise that Nazism and ISIS both have radical ideological beliefs and that such organizations can only be beaten through a total defeat. This premise is supported by a brief and useful elaboration on Nazi ideology as well as the premise that radical ideologies cannot compromise. I do not know that enough evidence was provided to prove the point that the two ideologies are similar enough to come to such a conclusion though. There are definite similarities, but the foundations for these ideologies are not the same. This is a false analogy because the most important parts of the two ideologies are different; ISIS are religious militants, they use sleeper cells and lone wolfs to attack, ISIS employs small mosques through various countries to recruit its members, they are called to action by their faith alone. Comparatively, Nazi ideology targeted religious groups and is a nationalistic ideology, they drafted millions into an army which engaged in large battles against other armies, the Nazi ideology was created by a single living man and when the war was lost Nazism was no longer a serious threat. I would say that due to this fallacy this aspect of Dromi’s argument is weak even though he did a good job explaining his reasoning and making his point clearly. Unfortunately, Dromi makes the mistake of
assuming that just because both groups are ideological in nature that they must also be equitable.
The final part of his Dromi’s argument relies on one dependant premise. Dromi’s final premise is that we must do more than just “quote” and instead use a multiple pronged strategy which attacks ISIS on several levels at once. Dromi does not provide evidence to back up his ideas but it is very clear, contains no fallacies and is reasonable. Overall, I would say that he needs to expand more onto the specifics of his plans and include credible evidence. This argument is poor but is the only substantive answer he has provided in terms of an actual solution and could be easily made serviceable with greater detail and evidential support.
In my opinion Dromi fails to consider several key components in his interpretation and does not do an adequate job of providing a solid argument.
One example of a missed opportunity in Dromi’s article is the analogy linking Nazism to ISIS. While I do believe the importance of referencing past conflict is absolutely imperative, Dromi choose poorly in what he decided to learn from. A much stronger connection exists between the IRA and modern terrorist groups such as ISIS then that between ISIS and Nazism. In a documentary done by the BBC, the history of the Irish Republican Army is reviewed and explained. The Issues underlying the rise of the IRA have a great deal in common with the important underlying issues ISIS has emerged from. For this reason, I believe that if we evaluate what caused, aggravated and ultimately ended hostilities between the IRA and the British government we will gain valuable insight into strategies that can be used to stop Isis. So, firstly, what initial issues existed that launched the IRA into existence? In the early 1900's there was a large and emotionally powerful sentiment that Ireland needed to be its own republic. This would mean that Britain had to relinquish control over its oldest colony - something they were not about to do. There was a sense of national duty among the men and women involved all throughout the IRA’s existence and was likely the primary reason many joined the group. Much like ISIS, national bonds strengthen the groups will and
gives them justifying grounds for the atrocities they commit. Another base factor in the radicalization of these groups are religious differences with their enemies. ISIS has radical Islam against the wests secular and Christian religious views and the IRA had its Catholicism against Britain and north Irelands Protestantism. Both groups highlight their different religious views and use them to justify their actions.