An Unorthodox Solution


An Unorthodox Solution to the Problem of ISIS, and the Chaos which Envelops the Earth

An Open Letter to the Legislative Branch of the United States of America

Ladies and Gentlemen of the Senate and House, in this fallen world that we live in, problems often arise that directly affect the USA. If the past is any precedent for dealing with problems, both domestically and internationally, then I have a strong unwavering faith in you, the lawmakers of this wonderful nation. Many times, these problems take far too long to be resolved, due to a lack of bipartisanship in the government. Some of the problems the USA has dealt with include: Slavery and the continued bickering over racial reconciliation, the Vietnam war, and Roe V. Wade, to name a few. The country was split on these issues, and had different ideas on what to do about them. I write this letter today to convince the lawmakers in our country to band together, in an effort to rid the world of a pestilence, and restore peace to the earth, together.

The United States, and much of the Free World finds itself threatened by the radical Muslim group known as ISIS or Daesh. This terrorist organization has killed tens of thousands of civilians, and has sown chaos throughout the Middle-East, forcing its muslim agenda down the throats of everyone, and killing them if they choose not to accept the doctrine of the Prophet Mohammad. They have been in the news for several years, and have been a driving political factor for the same amount of time, being a topic of discussion in Presidential debates, talk shows and are often plastered on the front page of major newspapers. Clearly, something needs to be done here, and it is up to you, the Senators and Members of Congress who possess the ability to write laws, to do that very thing.

Both parties have different approaches to this plague which is Daesh. The majority of the Republican party has stated that they support ground troops, no-fly zones, and safe zones, while much of the Democratic party is for the solutions of arming the Kurds and setting up multinational coalitions to deal with the problem. These are generalizations, but they cover the main beliefs that each party typically holds to.

First, let’s look at the Republican solutions, and see the problems with those. Ground troops? Are you serious? The last time that really worked was World War II. Look at all the recent conflicts where the United States has sent in ground troops: Korean War, Bay of Pigs,  War in Vietnam, Lebanon, Afghanistan, and the War in Iraq are just a few small examples of the United States sending troops in to foreign soil. The Gulf War is really the only example of “putting boots on the ground” in the past 70 years that has been massively successful for the United States. The argument is, of course, that “this time is different!” Well, I hate to break it to you, but all wars are different. Look at the precedent, and determine whether or not this is probable to work. What about no-fly zones and safe zones? These are merely band aids. The purpose of a band-aid is to protect an open wound while the body’s immune system fixes the wound. If Daesh is the wound and the world is the body, then no-fly zones and safe zones would be the Kroger brand “Band-Aid” which attempts to stop the spread of Daesh. The major problem with this bandaid is the fact that the body, which is in this case, the earth, does not have an immune system to annihilate Daesh while the bandaid stops or slows its spread. – are great, but they are useless unless the white blood cells are doing the job, and right now, the world doesn’t have any white blood cells on the job. There are other Republican responses to this issue, but they all boil down to the same two responses: no good precedence, or no permanent solution.

Now, let’s look at the Democratic solutions: arming local people, and setting up a multinational coalition. First, there is already precedent for arming our allies in the Middle East. The United States sent many weapons to the Iraqi army in order to aid them and their endeavors, only to find those same weapons, including at least one M-1 Abrams tank in possession of ISIS a short time later. It can be highly dangerous to send weapons to allies, as these same allies can be overrun by the common enemy, Daesh in this case. Supporting allies is important, but it is necessary to first have plans to support those allies directly, should they run into any problems which might result in the enemy’s acquisition of powerful weapons. This is tied to the Democratic party’s second solution of forming a multinational coalition to deal with Daesh. The mere formation of such a coalition will not deter Daesh, however, so this coalition will need to come up with plans to directly combat the radical forces. Notice a problem here? I’ve already gone over the main solutions to dealing directly with ISIS, and they all have massive flaws. Just because a large group of countries will be putting these plans into action, does not mean they will suddenly work. The problems are still present.

Right now, there is no clear, popular solution to the problem of Daesh that is on the table. The parties are extremely divided on this issue, with the Conservatives leading the literal “fight” while the Liberals are striving for “diplomacy,” neither of which is a viable solution. There is nearly always a solution, however, and this often involves thinking outside of the box.

The simplest solution often stares us in the face, as was the case with the Gordian knot, and Alexander the Great. An oracle had revealed to Alexander the Great that whoever would untie a certain incredibly complex knot would be the next ruler of Asia. After much deliberation, Alexander the Great took his sword and sliced right through the knot, severing it, and untying it. Incredibly, in the modern American political system, we have our own Alexander the Great. This man has promised great things, not only for himself, but for America in general, saying he will “Make America Great Again.”

Yes, members of the House and Senate, I am speaking of Donald J. Trump, the probable Republican nominee for POTUS, who started from the bottom (with a small loan of a million dollars) and eventually rose to the top. Donald Trump is America’s Alexander the Great, and he has proposed a solution to the Gordian knot which is Daesh. It’s incredibly simple, and it’s astounding that no one had said it before November 12th, 2015. What is this solution, you ask? What is the sword that will sever Daesh, obliterating them and insuring they will never return? What one, simple, out-of-the-box solution will lead to world peace? Trump said it best: “Bomb the shit out of them.”

This is a radical approach to the situation, but taking Occam’s Razor into account (basically, the simplest solution is the best one), then it is clear that “bombing the shit out of them” is the best, most logical option for the United States and allied forces. After all, if Daesh doesn’t exist anymore, then they certainly can’t attack us anymore! The war on terror will end, as all terrorists will be dead. Yes, civilians will die, but the terrorists will too, and that’s what we really need to be focusing on. In fact, I think Trump said it best when he stated, about terrorists, “you have to take out their families.” It’s kind of like Lion King, isn’t it? Scar (America) killed Mufasa (the terrorists), but let Simba (the terrorists’ families) live. What happened there? Simba came back, and killed, Scar, taking control. The old saying goes something like this: “Kittens are cute, but eventually they turn into cats, and cats are straight from the pits of hell.” The families of terrorists may be innocent right now, but we need to take a pre-emptive strike and “bomb the shit out of them” as well as the terrorists themselves.

There is an obvious problem to this severing of the Gordian knot: Daesh is spread out

amongst many areas in the Middle East, having declared provinces in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Egypt, Libya, Algeria, and Nigeria, as well as having small cells in many other countries. This is a huge section of the world, and it would take massive weapons with hugely destructive capabilities to deal with Daesh as it should be dealt with. Weapons of Mass Destruction, anybody?

Look, innocent people will die, but if the United States is really serious about the War on Terror, then they must destroy all terrorists, of which Daesh composes a prominent fraction. More children will be born, and once the radioactive fallout has dissipated a century from now, we can repopulate the Middle East. There are food crises anyways, so having fewer people would help out with that. Imagine how the USA would be seen if they not only destroyed Daesh, but also solved the world food crisis. Not only would we know ourselves as the greatest country on earth, but everyone else would also finally recognize it, and pay us homage.

What about Mutually Assured Destruction? Well, none of those countries except for Pakistan have WMDs, and I am certain that the countries which do possess nuclear weapons will see the situation in the same way that we, the people united under God, do. And really, Russia is the only country that has a similar number of weapons as we do. Even if other countries launch their nukes, we can overpower them with our second strike capability, and should be able to intercept many of their missiles, if not all. In fact, it may be best if we remove those countries anyways. Nuclear weaponry is a powerful tool that should only be held by the most upright of countries, and who knows what these countries, such as Israel, France (those socialists), the UK and others will do with these WMDs? For the safety of the free world, especially Americans, we should take out these countries. It may be possible to draft some disarmament legislature, and convince our allies at the very least to give up their weapons, but if not, we can simply blow them off the face of the planet.

When it comes down to it, Russia will be the biggest problem here. They have more nuclear weapons than we do, by most estimates, and they aren’t exactly allies. It would be in our best interest to destroy them entirely, and this is where my plan needs some editing. I am not sure what the best way to “bomb the shit out of them” would be, but I know it needs to happen. Maybe we could slip some spies into their facilities and sabotage a good number of their missiles? Please, when you write back, give me some ideas here.

After we take care of the other nuclear powers, the rest of the world could use some cleansing too. I like Canada, but I’m sure there are terrorists there, and possibly even some Daesh sympathizers. This cannot be allowed, so I vote we nuke them. Same with Mexico, Greenland, and all the Central and South American countries. If they aren’t American, then it’s best to get rid of them before they turn communist or muslim, and try to kill us and our children.

I think my solution might be the final solution: Take out everyone. We have enough nukes to protect ourselves, and we can destroy anyone who thinks differently than us. If America is the last country standing, then there won’t even be a challenger for “Greatest Country,” and I think we can all agree that is a good thing.

Once we get rid of the other countries, then world peace has almost been achieved. If our goal is to get rid of Daesh, then the best, most utilitarian way to finish the job would be to find all the Muslims in the United States, line them up in city squares, and mow them down. I realize that some of these muslims might not turn to Daesh, but we must realize that is a possibility. You all in the Senate and House should be able to draft some legislature that would allow for secret police that would have complete control over citizens. They need to be able to go anywhere, at any time, with no warrant. This is to protect our children, and give them a peaceful future.

With muslims out of the way, we’ll have to make sure everyone agrees. Honestly, there will always be racial tension, so we must deal with that. Since the majority of Americans are white, it would be most beneficial to eradicate all those who are not white. This shouldn’t be seen as a holocaust or genocide, merely a means to a peaceful end. Once all those who are not caucasian have been disposed of, the next big hurdle is economic equality. I realize that you, the senators and members of congress want to live, so the only way for this to work is for you to pass laws stating that only those who make over $100,000 yearly are allowed to live. If everyone is in the same financial bracket, then the fighting will be considerably lessened. I do request that you allow myself and a few choice friends and family members to live, since I came up with this plan and am giving it to you. We can discuss the terms later.

I realize now that my plan for getting rid of Daesh or ISIS has evolved into something even better: a plan for a completely peaceful world. I think this is a great thing. Continuing, with the entirety of the world containing the richest, whitest Americans, my plan for peace is almost complete. I’d imagine the two-party system amongst you all would still be a bit of a wedge, so the solution is this: whichever party has the senate lives. They have to kill the other party in its entirety. Might I suggest a gladiator-style cage match between the legislators, one state at a time? This will allow for near complete equality and unity. Really, there is only one thing standing that might split humanity, and cause anything but peace: sex.

Yes, one of the sexes must prevail in order to create a perfect world. I don’t know which one it should be, so I say, go at it! Fight with any weapons that you have at your disposal, and do your best to eradicate the other sex! Once this is complete, I’d imagine that the world will be 99% peaceful. That does leave one very small percent, however.

You see, there will always be strife in the head of a single man. He’ll always be fighting himself over issues, even when he is the last one left. If we truly want a perfect world, then all remaining people will need to die. We can either implement suicide as an option, or just wait until they die of natural causes, but this is the last, most crucial step to achieving world peace. Once everyone is dead, then peace will finally reign, and conflict will be a thing of the past. Isn’t peace what we want? Isn’t that why America has taken the mantle of “World Police” onto its shoulders?

Ladies and Gentlemen of the Senate and House, I would like to end by thanking you for your sacrificial service in the government of the greatest country that has ever, and will ever exist. Your hard work, dedication to the betterment of America, and strict moral guidelines have led this country closer to the ideals of Thomas More’s Utopia than any country before us, and will undoubtedly continue to do so. I believe that when Christ spoke of “a second earth,” he was referring to the act of lifting the United States right off the face of the planet and transforming it into a brand new world. I realize that my presentation is unorthodox, but desperate times call for desperate measures. Yes, the two parties in America could possibly work together, using their strategies in a sort of bipartisan manner, putting a band-aid on the issue whilst actually fixing it, but even that will not lead to world peace. I realize my plan is not complete, but I have faith that it will function as an outline that you can rewrite and implement to make the world a better place.

Thank you, and may God Bless the United States of America Even More than He Already Has,

J. Clark Hubbard

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s