Expressive.

Like her, hate her, or fear her, Giorgia Meloni has the most expressive face in politics today.

Wars and Rumors of War, 2023, Part 7. Summer.

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-july-26-2023

July 9, 2023

Russo Ukrainian War

President Zelenskyy has been in Turkey where he met with and received oral support from the Turkish government, and where he appeared with Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I, the head of the Eastern Orthodox Churches.

July 10, 2023

US v. ISIL

US Reaper drones killed had been flying ISIL leader Usamah al-Muhajir, while he was riding a motorcycle in the Aleppo region.  The same drones had earlier been harassed by Russian fighter aircraft.

July 11, 2023

Russo Ukrainian War

Turkey has quit blocking Sweden's admittance into NATO.

Russian submarine commander Stanislav Rzhitskiy, whose vessel fired on a Ukrainian city early in the war, was shot dead on a morning run near the Olimp sport complex in Krasnodar, southern Russia, according to reports.

July 12, 2023

Russo Ukrainian War

Turkey dropped objections to Sweden joining NATO, which shall now occur.

A missile strike reportedly killed Deputy Commander of the Russian Southern Military District, Lieutenant General Oleg Tsokov.

July 13, 2023

Russo Ukrainian War

Maj. Gen. Ivan Popov, the commander of the 58th Army, has been relieved of his command.  He announced his removal to his troops.

The Group of Seven and NATO signed agreements to offer Ukraine long-term security commitments, signalling a more formal arrangement to come, likely after the conclusion of the war.

This more or less means that unless Russia completely defeats Ukraine in the current war, one of Russia's war aims has been lost.

July 14, 2023

Russo Ukrainian War

The US will be deploying 3,000 Reservists to Europe in support of the US's efforts to aid Ukraine.

July 14, cont:

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including sections 121 and 12304 of title 10, United States Code, I hereby determine that it is necessary to augment the active Armed Forces of the United States for the effective conduct of Operation Atlantic Resolve in and around the United States European Command’s area of responsibility.  In furtherance of this operation, under the stated authority, I hereby authorize the Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary of Homeland Security with respect to the Coast Guard when it is not operating as a service in the Navy, under their respective jurisdictions, to order to active duty any units, and any individual members not assigned to a unit organized to serve as a unit of the Selected Reserve, or any member in the Individual Ready Reserve mobilization category and designated as essential under regulations prescribed by the Secretary concerned, not to exceed 3,000 total members at any one time, of whom not more than 450 may be members of the Individual Ready Reserve, as they deem necessary, and to terminate the service of those units and members ordered to active duty.

This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

                             JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR.

This is the first time I've actually seen an order which refers to the Individual Ready Reserve.  It makes sense, actually, as IRR troops may have individual skills that would be useful in a t raining role.

My guess is that the IRR troops will be all volunteers for activation.

July 15, 2023

Russo Ukrainian War

Putin has indicated that he intends to keep the Wagner Group as a fighting force, but separated from its leader.

The SA, we would not, never amounted to what it had been before Ernst Röhm was offed.

July 16, 2023

Russo Ukrainian War

Wagner has been seen in Belarus and there are plans for it to conduct joint drills with the Belorussian army.

Something about this is really odd, and has to relate to whatever deal was struck.   The Belorussian Army is generally regarded as pretty bad, FWIW.

Russian 106th Guards Airborne (VDV) Division Commander Major General Vladimir Seliverstov has been relieved of his command.  It is not known why, but he was noted for speaking up for his troops.

July 17, 2023

Russo Ukrainian War

Russia has pulled out of the Black Sea grain shipment deal.

On This Week, Chris Christie maintained that Russia's war in Ukraine is being backed by the Chinese for Chinese objectives. This is becoming a persistent Republican theme.  That the Chinese may be backing Russia doesn't surprise me, but the suggestion that the war is a Chinese proxy war, which is being made, doesn't ring true.

July 18, 2023

Russo Ukrainian War

Attempting to take advantage of commitment of Ukrainian forces elsewhere, the Russians are mounting an offensive in northeast Ukraine.

Ukraine hit the bridge from Crimea to the mainland again, heavily damaging it.

July 19, 2023

Russo Ukrainian War

As Russian minefields take their toll on western-supplied tanks and Ukrainian sappers, their forces have so-far retaken approximately five miles of the sixty miles they need to split the land-bridge connecting Russia to Crimea. The land between Mariupol in the east and Melitopol to the west is seen as the vital ground to achieving this.

It is incredibly tough going for the Ukrainians. They lack the air cover and advanced jets to protect their ground forces from Russian attack helicopters and fighters. Their soldiers, meanwhile must negotiate miles of minefields, tank-traps and then ultimately the heavily dug Russian trench networks.

This gruelling endeavour was always going to take longer than the occasionally impatient international audience was prepared to wait for. It is a military effort of immense proportions, where mass, manpower, morale, equipment, stocks, logistics, grit and luck all play vital roles. So far, the Ukrainians are displaying all of these military qualities.

* * * 

While much fighting remains to be done across Ukraine’s southern farmlands over the coming months, governments across the west must be prepared for the grim prospect of territorial concessions as one potential political outcome of a failed counter-offensive. Whether a Putinist Kremlin would respect such a deal if Kyiv were to receive security pledges short of full Nato membership is extremely doubtful.  

Regardless, this would surely be a favoured outcome for China’s ruling “wolf warrior” foreign policy elite. Beijing would be utterly delighted if the war were to end with Ukraine divided, Russian troops permanently in the Donbas harassing Kyiv and Europe, and Nato fractured on political lines. Such an outcome would be a gift to China as Xi Jinping begins to ramp up his own imperialistic and extra-territorial ambitions across the Indo-Pacific – and a devastating defeat for the West. 

The Telegraph. 

Russia is amassing vast numbers of troops and equipment along the northern frontline in Ukraine, Kyiv has warned.

Serhii Cherevatyi, spokesperson for the Eastern Group of Forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, told local television that Moscow had gathered more than 100,000 troops on the Lyman-Kupiansk axis, as well as 900 tanks, 555 artillery systems and 370 multiple rocket launchers.

Newsweek. 

The Ukrainians are obviously not beaten, and ISW feels the troops in the north that Russia intends to commit to a counteroffensive are of poor quality and will not be successful, but it's obviously the case that the Ukrainian offensive is not achieving its goals in the face of Russian defense in depth and massive use of mines.

July 20, 2023

Russo Ukrainian War

Russia conducted a missile offensive on Ukrainian ports yesterday, no doubt designed to disrupt Ukrainian grain shipments.

July 21, 2023

Russo Ukrainian War

July 21, cont.

Igor Girkin, who is associated with the shooting down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, killing 298 people, was arrested in Russia today by Russian authorities.

Heads continue to keep rolling.

July 24, 2023

Russo Ukrainian War

Now Ukraine is in a battle to get back more of the land that Russia seized from it. It's already taken back about 50 percent of what was initially seized. Now they're in a very hard fight to take back more. These are still relatively early days of the counteroffensive. It is tough.

Secretary of State Anthony Blinken. 

Drones hit two buildings in Moscow.

A Russian missile strike on Odessa badly damaged the Cathedral of the Transfiguration.

July 26, 2023

Russo Ukrainian War

Ukraine has launched a massive offensive action against Russians in the Zaporizhzhia region. They appear to have cleared defensive obstacles and are pushing through.

July 27, 2023

Russo Ukrainian War

Ukrainian forces launched a significant mechanized counteroffensive operation in western Zaporizhia Oblast on July 26 and appear to have broken through certain pre-prepared Russian defensive positions south of Orikhiv. Russian sources, including the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) and several prominent milbloggers, claimed that Ukrainian forces launched an intense frontal assault towards Robotyne (10km south of Orikhiv) and broke through Russian defensive positions northeast of the settlement.[1] Geolocated footage indicates that Ukrainian forces likely advanced to within 2.5km directly east of Robotyne during the attack before Russian forces employed standard doctrinal elastic defense tactics and pushed Ukrainian troops back somewhat, although not all the way back to their starting positions.

There are now multiple reports that a "second phase" or "main phase" of the Ukrainian summer offensive have been launched

Niger

Members of the armed forces are attempting a coup.

Syria

Russian Air Force fighters continue to interfere with American drones.

July 31, 2023

Russo Ukrainian War

Ukrainian drones struck targets in Moscow again within the last 24 hours.

Former President Donald Trump, and current candidate, urged aid to Ukraine to be suspended until evidence regarding Hunter Biden is submitted fully to Congress.

These topics are not rationally related to each other, but Trump is demonstrating increasing irrationality in the face of multiple criminal investigations concerning his post election activities.

China v. US

It is being asserted that China has inserted malware into computer networks servicing U.S bases.

August 4, 2023

An attack on the Russian port of Novorossiysk by Ukrainian drones resulted in a Russian warship capsizing.

August 6, 2023

Niger

The military asked for help from the Wagner Group to defend itself against anticipated military action by African states to restore the democracy in that country.

Russo Ukrainian War

From the Trib:

DRONES STRIKE RUSSIAN TANKER, PORT

Russia raised the upper limit for conscription to 30 years of age.

August 7, 2023

Niger

Niger has closed its airspace.

August 13, 2023

Russo Ukrainian War

Poland is deploying up to 10,000 troops on its border with Belarus due to the presence of Wagner mercenaries being deployed on the Belorussian side of the border.

August 17, 2023

Russo Ukrainian War

Ukraine has taken Urozhaine.

August 18, 2023

Russo Ukrainian War

A Defense Department briefing of Congressmen has stated that Ukraine will not reach the southeastern city of Melitopol, presuming that to be a key objective, and therefore will not sever Russia’s land bridge to Crimea this year.  

The report attributes it to minefields and Ukraine determining to ignore Western advice to use a schwerpunkt, particularly after having encountered initial heavy Russian resistance and large-scale losses, something amplified by a lack of air cover.

The report finds that Ukrainian forces will remain several miles outside of Melitopol at the conclusion of the offensive.

There's no way to put a happy face on this conclusion, if it comes true.  Opting for attriting Russian forces was reverting to World War One tactics.

At the same time, however, there are now reports of Ukraine committing troops in large numbers which it had held back earlier.

August 18, cont:

A less gloomy view:

August 20, 2023

Russo Ukrainian War

Ukrainian troops have broken through to the north of Tokmak.

Ukrainian forces conducted a drone strike on Soltsy airbase in Novgorod Oblast.

August 22, 2023

Russo Ukrainian War

Ukrainian forces made tactically significant gains in and east of Robotyne in western Zaporizhia Oblast on August 20-21 while continuing counteroffensive operations on the Donetsk-Zaporizhia Oblast administrative border and in eastern Ukraine.

August 23, 2023

Russo Ukrainian War

Wagner boss Yevgeny Prigozhin was on the passenger list of a jet which crashed killing all on board, Russia's civil aviation authority has said. 

The BBC.

It can't help but be noted that opponents of Putin have a bizarrely high attrition rate and an unusual number of accidents.  It could just be coincidence, but it's weird.

cont:  

The early reports had this plane as shot down.

Video shows a plane that looks like it was shot down.

cont:

President Biden on the death of Wagner Group leader Yevgeny Prigozhin: "I said I would be careful of what I drink and what I rode in. I don't know for a fact what happened, but I'm not surprised."

CSPAN.

As an aside, somehow those who hate everything Biden and love everything Trump will find a way to criticize that pretty honest comment, whereas if Trump said the same thing (which he couldn't due to his weird diction), they'd think it the soul of wit.

August 24, 2023

Russo Ukrainian War

The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) and the Kremlin have been destroying the Wagner private military company (PMC) and weakening Prigozhin’s authority since the rebellion – and the assassination of Wagner’s top leadership was likely the final step to eliminate Wagner as an independent organization. 

Cont:

Kristina Raspopova.

She was the flight attendant of Embraer Legacy 600 Business Jet blown out of the sky in order to kill Yevgeny Prigozhin and other Wagnerites.  The young woman had taken the flight in order to be able to return home and to her next station early.

It's not possible to weep for Yevgeny Prigozhin.  He lived by the sword and died by it, and the actions of his men have been brutal.  It is possible to hope that he realized the gravity of his sins and reconciled before his death.

But killing innocent stewardesses is just flat out murder.

August 25, 2023

Russo Ukrainian War

Ukraine conducted an amphibious commando raid on the facilities of the Crimean municipalities of Olenivka and Mayak.

August 27, 2023

Russo Ukrainian War

Ukrainian forces continue to grain in the western Zaporizhia Oblast and may be close to breaking out.

August 30, 2023

Gabon

The Gabonese Army has taken over that country in a coup following an election which returned to office a member of the family that has ruled the country for 50 years.

Russo Ukrainian War.

Ukrainian paratroopers, in a ground assault role, are flanking Russian positions at Novoprokopivka, a town that sits on the T0408/0401 road threading south through Tokmak to Melitopol.

Ukraine is receiving an additional $250,000,000 in U.S. aid.

A Ukrainian drone attack occured on the airfield at Pskov.

August 31, 2023

China v. Taiwan

The US has approved $80,000,000 in aid to Taiwan under the Foreign Military Financing, something normally only done for soveign states.

Taiwan, which is the Republic of China, has never declared independence from China. Rather, it's claim to be China's legitimate government has been quietly abandoned over the years.  The People's Republic of China, of course, claims the island as it's own and continually threatens to invade it.  In reality, Taiwan is de facto independent if not de jure, a status which really ought to change, and which this is a step towards.

It'll probably enrage the Red menance.

Russo Ukrainian War

Ukrainian light infantry has infiltrated east of Russian field fortifications near Verbove.

Chechen Republic Head Ramzan Kadyrov has reiterated his loyalty to Russian President Vladimir Putin in a continued attempt to distance himself from the late Yevgeny Prigozhin.   I ownder if he's avoiding going up stairs recently?

Last Prior Edition:

Wars and Rumors of War, 2023, Part 6. Late Spring.

Recent Related Threads:

Magic Weapons

A remarkable photograph.

Quite the picture.

I don't know who everyone is, and I don't know who to attribute this photograph to.  It might be a NATO official photo, but it's remarkable.

Joe Biden is in the center, and next to him to his left is Conservative British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, who is also the first Prime Minister of the UK of Indian descent, and the first to be a member of a non-Christian religion (Disraeli was born into the Jewish faith, but baptized in the Anglican Church at age 12). Behind Biden is Turkey's Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.  The woman in the right hand corner of the photo is Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni.

NATO has revived enormously during Biden's administration.  It's expanded.  You wouldn't have seen this under Donald Trump, or any other President for that matter.

Should we Declare War?

Against the Islamic State.

And no, I'm not kidding.

And no, I don't mean authorize the use of force.  I mean declare war, as in Congress acting under Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution.

Woodrow Wilson addressing Congress to ask for a Declaration of War against Germany.

The United States Constitution provides, at Article I, Section 8:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;—And

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

Congress does pretty much all that stuff, save for its power "To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water".  Its forgotten how to do that.  Indeed, at least arguably, the United States has fought at least one war illegally since World War Two, but fighting a true, in the legal sense, war without a declaration of war, that war being the first Gulf War.

The United States hasn't declared war since World War Two.  In part that's because the conflicts we've been involved in since that time didn't really call for a Declaration of War, as not every conflict is a war.  In part it's because it's just flat out easier not to do it, and Congress has taken advantage of that.  And that should really end.  Or, perhaps more bluntly, somebody should have taken the first US lead invasion or perhaps the second one on as an illegal act, which would have forced Congress to actually recall  this part of the Constitution. And an illegal act it was, at least in the context of the second war against Iraq.

 But in order to understand that, we have to understand what a war is.

I've written on this before.  Congress has seemingly forgotten what a war is, and how to declare one, and why.  So, perhaps a refresher is in order, before we explore the reason why Congress should declare war on the Islamic State.

A war, basically, is armed litigation between nations.

Sounds weird, but that's what it is.  Indeed, in the English legal system, civil litigation itself is actually a substitute for private warfare, which was once used to settle disputes, and as a result, litigation bears many close resemblances to warfare.  As I earlier noted on this blog:

Wars have been called "duels between nations."  And in the era in which duels were quasi legal,that made some sense, in that those contests were subject to a certain code of conduct, and had certain defined rules.  A better definition, however, is that wars are a type of international lawsuit, subject to fairly well defined and strict rules of procedure and conduct, much like lawsuits are. For that matter, duels were also, but that's because lawsuits and duels have a common origin, as odd as that may seem.  Trial by combat was widely accepted as a legal means of settling private disputes in the Middle Ages, and was really only outlawed when it became to expensive for society, replaced by civil litigation.  Even at that, for "affairs of honor" duels were tolerated, if illegal, for centuries, albeit governed by a strict code of conduct.

Wars are like lawsuits. The Combatants have a species of legal relationship between each other, and the law governs the State of War between them.  War can, moreover, only be engaged in between sovereign states, who are the only entities which can legitimately wage war.  Wars begin with a Declaration of War, and when one country has had enough, that country "sues for peace" and a treaty of peace, or a complete surrender, ensues, returning a State of Peace.

 Medieval jousting wasn't just a sport, it was also part of trial by combat, in which the contestants frequently hired champions to serve in their stead, just as modern litigants will hire lawyers to do the same.

Congress has pretty much either forgotten that it can declare war, or perhaps it lives in fear of doing so. To my surprise, at least the press doesn't, as during the last week reporters have asked the Presidential candidates this very question, which they've dodged, should we declare war on the Islamic State?  The President has sort of been queried on this as well. The answer always is that "we are at war with ISIL" and then they move quickly on.  Not wanting to address the real question, should we, or even must we, declare war on the Islamic State?

So, why declare war on the Islamic State?  Put another way, must we declare war on the Islamic State if we intend to fight it?  And, what arguments are there against declaring war against the Islamic State. 

What would the effect of a declaration of war against the Islamic State do?

To start with, we must note again that wars can only occur between sovereigns.  

That's why no declaration of war would have made sense during the Vietnam War.  The National Liberation Front, the correct name of the Viet Cong, wasn't a sovereign entity. It was a guerrilla army. And it was backed by a sovereign, North Vietnam, but it wasn't a sovereign itself.  Soldiers of the Viet Cong were rebels, and hence involved in an illegality.

Viet Cong prisoner of war, with soldiers of the Army of the Republic of Vietnam in the background (note the tiger stripe combat uniforms).  Technically a solder of the National Liberation Front, so called as it had the pretext of being a nationalist rather than a communist movement, the communist guerrillas were rebels, and therefore did not fight in a legal war.

So too was the case for Confederates in the American Civil War.  The Confederate States was never recognized by any nation as a sovereign, and therefore the Confederates legally were American citizens in rebellion against their government, technically traitors.  Only the wise and good graces of the North kept them from being treated that way, and later the United States Supreme Court recognized what many of such wars tend to be, that it was an insurrection with characteristics of a belligerency.  In other words, it was darned near a war, but not quite.

Confederate infantryman during the Civil War.  Legally, he wasn't a soldier of a legitimate sovereign nation, but a rebel against his own nation.  But the United States chose to treat Confederates differently, an act very rare for the legitimate and victorious sovereign.

What about, it should be asked, Continental forces during the Revolution? Well, the Continental Congress had a theory of sovereignty from the very onset, and we came to be recognized by two European nations during the war, but the fact that we are basically regarded as a sovereign in that war is, frankly, because we won, and because we won with a theory.

Anyhow, if we declared war against the Islamic State, we'd be according them sovereign status.  That doesn't mean, however, that we'd be granting them state status.  The United States has a long history of dealing with stateless sovereigns, as Indian tribes were accorded that status, and are still sovereigns today. But we have to be frank, we'd be according them  the status of a legitimate sovereign.

Which frankly might just be recognizing reality.  It basically is a state right now, occupying huge chunks of Iraq and Syria.

Now, that also would mean that it's fighting me would be regarded as legitimate soldiers of a sovereign, when in true combat, rather than in terrorist activities. Terrorism is illegal under any definition.  But as an act of war, it's a war crime.

And the Islamic State is perpetrating a lot of activities that, if committed by a sovereign, are war crimes.  The list is too disgusting to set out, but is well known.  So, when (if?) it is defeated, its leaders would legitimately be subject to international war crimes trials.

What would be the advantage, if any, of declaring war on the Islamic State?

Well, for one thing, it makes it clear what we're really doing.

And right now we seemingly lack that clarity.  We claim we're at war with ISIL but we don't really seem to know what that means. Maybe it means helping France, which also claims its at war with ISIL but doesn't quite seem to know what that means.  Maybe that means contributing air assets only, at least if President Obama's views hold.  Maybe it means muddling along for years until somebody else hopefully takes care of the problem.  Indeed, that seems to be a fairly likely scenario.

Declaring war, however, leaves that declaration hanging over the nation's head, and that means something has to get done.  Frankly, that probably would mean the commitment of ground troops, and that is probably the only way that this is going to get done in any sort of short order.

It also means that we would have to have real war aims, as during war the nation always seeks to define them.  Indeed, simply asking for a declaration of war defines those aims in a way approving the use of the armed forces does not.  We don't declare war in a mushy fashion.

A declaration of war would also likely invoke Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, which would require all the signatories to the treaty (you too, Justin Trudeau) to contribute to the war effort. This is only proper as so far at least seven signatories to that treaty have seen Islamic extremist violence in their nations and they're all bearing the brunt of the humanitarian crisis the war in Syria and Iraq is causing.  At least three of those nations have already stated that they are at war with ISIL, and a collection of them are already engaged in combat, mostly in the air, but a little on the ground there.  Declaring war, and invoking Article 5, brings this matter to a head, and rapidly.  And it also would require the participation of reluctant NATO partners that need to be focused, including a nervous Turkey that is at least somewhat pursing its own goals.

And all that, that is boots on the ground, leaves a European influence, accepting that we are a European culture, in place when the war is over.  Only a western influence is going to prevent this from reoccurring, particularly if we consider that what we're seeing is in some way the most recent flare up of something that's been occurring for 1400 years and for which their a sovereign incubator in the form of Saudi Arabia.

And, and perhaps most importantly, it gives the United States a legal vehicle to deal with ISIL sympathizers on out own soil, which right now we really lack.  That may be the single biggest reason to declare war.

It isn't illegal, in any form, to wish ISIL on to global victory.  We currently have a lot of focus on how the killers in San Bernadino became "radicalized" (as if that's all that difficult to figure out).  But what seems to be missing is that it's no crime to be a radical Islamist.  Indeed, a legal resident of the US may go along ways towards equipping themselves for a terrorist act perfectly legally. 

Another reason to declare war would be so that the US could deal more easily with terrorists on our won shores.  That may constitute the single biggest reason to issue a declaration of war.

With all the discussion about various groups who might be inclined to strike us, right here at home, next to no discussion has centered on the fact that it isn't illegal to hold bad feelings against the United States.  Indeed, frankly, any person with unbridled patriotism ought to be suspect as "my country right or wrong" is not a morally defensible position.  That isn't to defend Islamic extremist terrorist, but we must note that merely being an Islamic extremist isn't a crime.  Being a Nazi isn't a crime.  Being a Communist isn't a crime.  Nor do we want any of these things to be criminal.

But committing an act of violence against your fellows is a crime, and it also isn't a legitimate act of war.  So, by declaring war, we don't create a cover for domestic terrorist.  We would, however, create a legal means to be more ably arrest potential terrorist prior to their striking.

Right now, we practically have to wait until they attack, unless they commit other crimes on their route to a strike.  If they stockpile illegal arms or make bombs, yes, we can arrest them. But we really can't detain them simply for advocating armed aggression against the United States.  Oh, I know, it's a crime to advocate that, but its one that's difficult to prove.  War powers would allow greater leeway to the government to detain, with due process, those who seem to be strongly advocating armed action against the country.

Now, clearly a person has to careful about this, and note that I used the words "due process".  We can't treat every Muslim as an enemy alien.  But we might be able to better do something about those advocating bringing the Caliphate to the US by violence if we were armed with war powers.  Or, on the other hand, that  might just be a power that would get abused.

Before leaving that thought, however, here's also where the topic of firearms and terrorists is better addressed, perhaps.  Even if we would arrest very few anticipated enemies, we would have broader powers to put certain people on a "no arms" list.  Again, due process would be required, or more likely "some kind of process", but this would be a better approach than simply relying on the "no fly list".  Advocate armed incursion on behalf of the Islamic State, no arms for you.

What would be the disadvantage of declaring war on the Islamic State?

The big disadvantage of declaring war on the Islamic State is that it accords it state status, and that goes a long ways towards legitimizing its position.

The Islamic State claims the right to exclusively speak for all Muslims, and it also holds that all Muslims owe it allegiance.  If claims to be a restored caliphate.  If we recognize it as a state, it's claim sounds a lot more credible.

And at that point, perhaps a nightmare turns into a bigger nightmare.

Right now, most Muslims everywhere don't recognize the Islamic State as anything, and no Shiia recognizes it.  If it were granted state status, those on the fence in the Sunni worlds, where it has a fair amount of appeal with some, might leap.  I.e., if the Western World is at war with the Caliphate, well which way must they go? 

Indeed, a person can spin that out in some pretty scary directions.  Say we declare war and that results in a flood of new recruits and an increase in terrorism in the Western World.  That might tip the balance temporarily in the Middle East, and if they gained enough strength to push out the Shiia government in Baghdad and the Baathist regime in Damascus, they might have to spread the fight.  Who wold be next ?  Jordan, which would probably result in a war with Israel, or perhaps Saudi Arabia, with the US then having the nightmare scenario spread to a fight to keep the Islamic State out of Mecca.  Imagine that. 

Indeed, it's for that reason that declaring war is a bad idea, in spite of my long winded analysis of it, and my seeming advocacy for what otherwise looks like that dramatic step.  At the end of the day, declaring war on the Islamic State is a bad idea, as it makes it into an Islamic state.  And we don't want that.

But, it might become one, all on its own. Which is why we need to get our act together, in this "conflict" (not a war), right now.  And that involves no easy steps.

The Big Speech: The North Atlantic Treaty

The Parties to this Treaty reaffirm their faith in the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and their desire to live in peace with all peoples and all governments.
They are determined to safeguard the freedom, common heritage and civilisation of their peoples, founded on the principles of democracy, individual liberty and the rule of law. They seek to promote stability and well-being in the North Atlantic area.
They are resolved to unite their efforts for collective defence and for the preservation of peace and security. They therefore agree to this North Atlantic Treaty :

Article 1

The Parties undertake, as set forth in the Charter of the United Nations, to settle any international dispute in which they may be involved by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered, and to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.

Article 2

The Parties will contribute toward the further development of peaceful and friendly international relations by strengthening their free institutions, by bringing about a better understanding of the principles upon which these institutions are founded, and by promoting conditions of stability and well-being. They will seek to eliminate conflict in their international economic policies and will encourage economic collaboration between any or all of them.

Article 3

In order more effectively to achieve the objectives of this Treaty, the Parties, separately and jointly, by means of continuous and effective self-help and mutual aid, will maintain and develop their individual and collective capacity to resist armed attack.

Article 4

The Parties will consult together whenever, in the opinion of any of them, the territorial integrity, political independence or security of any of the Parties is threatened.

Article 5

The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security .

Article 6 (1)

For the purpose of Article 5, an armed attack on one or more of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack:

• on the territory of any of the Parties in Europe or North America, on the Algerian Departments of France (2), on the territory of or on the Islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer;
• on the forces, vessels, or aircraft of any of the Parties, when in or over these territories or any other area in Europe in which occupation forces of any of the Parties were stationed on the date when the Treaty entered into force or the Mediterranean Sea or the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer.

Article 7

This Treaty does not affect, and shall not be interpreted as affecting in any way the rights and obligations under the Charter of the Parties which are members of the United Nations, or the primary responsibility of the Security Council for the maintenance of international peace and security.

Article 8

Each Party declares that none of the international engagements now in force between it and any other of the Parties or any third State is in conflict with the provisions of this Treaty, and undertakes not to enter into any international engagement in conflict with this Treaty.

Article 9

The Parties hereby establish a Council, on which each of them shall be represented, to consider matters concerning the implementation of this Treaty. The Council shall be so organised as to be able to meet promptly at any time. The Council shall set up such subsidiary bodies as may be necessary; in particular it shall establish immediately a defence committee which shall recommend measures for the implementation of Articles 3 and 5.

Article 10

The Parties may, by unanimous agreement, invite any other European State in a position to further the principles of this Treaty and to contribute to the security of the North Atlantic area to accede to this Treaty. Any State so invited may become a Party to the Treaty by depositing its instrument of accession with the Government of the United States of America. The Government of the United States of America will inform each of the Parties of the deposit of each such instrument of accession.

Article 11

This Treaty shall be ratified and its provisions carried out by the Parties in accordance with their respective constitutional processes. The instruments of ratification shall be deposited as soon as possible with the Government of the United States of America, which will notify all the other signatories of each deposit. The Treaty shall enter into force between the States which have ratified it as soon as the ratifications of the majority of the signatories, including the ratifications of Belgium, Canada, France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States, have been deposited and shall come into effect with respect to other States on the date of the deposit of their ratifications. (³)

Article 12

After the Treaty has been in force for ten years, or at any time thereafter, the Parties shall, if any of them so requests, consult together for the purpose of reviewing the Treaty, having regard for the factors then affecting peace and security in the North Atlantic area, including the development of universal as well as regional arrangements under the Charter of the United Nations for the maintenance of international peace and security.

Article 13

After the Treaty has been in force for twenty years, any Party may cease to be a Party one year after its notice of denunciation has been given to the Government of the United States of America, which will inform the Governments of the other Parties of the deposit of each notice of denunciation.

Article 14

This Treaty, of which the English and French texts are equally authentic, shall be deposited in the archives of the Government of the United States of America. Duly certified copies will be transmitted by that Government to the Governments of other signatories.