As long as ignorant Western politicians allow Muslim immigration, and also allow them to congregate in ghettos, of course terror attacks will be inevitable. Immigration is now their key to a world caliphate. Muslims couldn't keep the parts of Europe they over- ran four or five centuries ago. They learned their lesson then, and now they are using immigration as their main weapon. The more Muslims let into the West, the more terror attacks. The West is committing slow suicide.

yep a man who blows himself up for 72 virgins is as naive/evil as the many who have killed in the name of no god. Millions of unborn babies killed verifies that fact. Better to serve the loving God who sent His Son to forgive man's horrendous acts.

Yes, and given that's so, no case can be made for allowing these medieval cultures any further access to their intended targets.

Only rejection and repatriation beckons as does assisted interviews that allow spage age lie detection to be covertly deployed. But particularly in the case of returning radicalized rebels.

And then allow some covert racial/ethnic profiling and surveillance, given incompatible cultures are an integral part of the problem? FIT IN OR GET OUT!

And given the inevitability of murderous clashes, not changed by PHD's, nice affable manners and counterfeit winning smiles? No case can be made for inclusion or permitted cohabitation, just rejection and repatriation, using all necessary force/medication!

And assisted as an intended outcome by remote controlled single use transfer vehicles, life boats and passenger gliders? With or without permission, no ifs, buts or maybes!
Rhrosty.

The author appears to suffer the "do-goodism" of liberal-wet American academics.

Of the three strategies he suggests:

1. "The prerequisite of defeating ISIS"

Appears the most direct and viable. Western and Russian armies + airforces are well equipped at fighting a war against the ISIS conventional/insurgent hybrid army in Iraq, Syria and soon Afghanistan.

Particularly the Russian forces are grinding down the ISIS oil selling business model.

But A. - the more Sunni forces (like ISIS) are weakened the stronger Shiite forces grow (including Iran). The (sunni) Saudis and (jewish) Israelis are not happy about a strengthed Shiite State (Iran) or stronger Shiite militia (including Hezbollah in Lebanon).

But B. once the ISIS leaders and manpower are destroyed in the Middle East they will be replaced by other radical Sunnis (many of whom are defending towns and land against the Shiites).

There is no peaceful outcome in the short to medium term from this situation. As in the 1980-88 Sunni Iraq vs Shiite Iran war letting Sunnis and Shiite fight it out may be best for the West and Russia.

If defending the Gulf oil monarchies (Saudis, Kuwait, UAE etc) is a major Western concern then these monarchies need to turn their huge defence budgets into actual fighting power. Too often Saudi princes have treated military hardware (especially jets) as royal playthings.

Sunni Egypt, with a sound military tradition (eg. 1973 War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yom_Kippur_War#Egyptian_attack ) could teach the oil monarchies how to organise an effective army to defend aginst the Iran threat and Shiite Iraq threat.