You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Terror Networks
Most Americans say send ground troops to fight ISIS
2015-12-08
[CNN] While President Barack Obama
Jedi mind meld...
addressed the nation on ISIS and terrorism Sunday night, a new CNN/ORC Poll finds Americans increasingly displeased with the President's handling of terrorism and more willing to send U.S. ground troops into the fight against ISIS.

For the first time in CNN/ORC polling, a majority of Americans (53%) say the U.S. should send ground troops to Iraq or Syria to fight ISIS. At the same time, 6-in-10 disapprove of the President's handling of terrorism and 68% say America's military response to the terrorist group thus far has not been aggressive enough.
The public's opinion is more sensible than the govt's. The qualifier would have to lie in the planning and in the ROE. Plan individual operations with fixed objectives, for instance taking Raqqa or Mosul (not both). Have the thing put together by a real general and his own staff, not the NSC or the White House glee club, a Schwartzkopf not a Westmoreland. Use sufficient force, probably two divisions, not Special Forces or some sort of other false economies. Execute the mission, which would be to cut all supply lines to Raqqa, then bomb/shell it to rubble, then send troops in to kill anybody wearing a turban, a beard, or an RPG.

Then leave. Let the Kurds worry about "nation building" if they want to be bothered. If they need money and arms provide them; they're the only real friends we've got in the area.

Rinse. Repeat if necessary. Eventually it won't be and the civilian casualties will be lower than they would be using the sanctimonious approach.

Posted by:Fred

#9  > Both the Qaeda + ISIS Boyz have made multiple direct threats to attack CONUS andor US interests.
> Better "over there" than "over here" - I don't care who youse are, + neither does mainstream America.
> Best way historically to make certain of de facto Enemy defeat, subornment or destruction, is via one's own Army = Armed Forces, as opposed to relying on that Allies or Neutrals.

As things stand, the Bammer doesn't even seem to be interested in forming a new US or UNSC-led Military Coalition to end the AQ = Al-Nusra + ISIS, ETAL. THREATS ONCE-N-FOREVAR!
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2015-12-08 19:59  

#8  Defend the Kurds, help them retake their lands in Iraq but let the other powers (France, UK, and Russia) take the lead for a change while we complain about different mistakes and decisions.
Posted by: rjschwarz   2015-12-08 15:29  

#7  Because people believe in one liners rather than analysis. We were at war for nearly a hundred years on the frontier with spurts and spasms to accentuate the experience.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2015-12-08 15:03  

#6  As Designed.
Posted by: CrazyFool   2015-12-08 14:07  

#5  The path we are following just leads to low grade war, forever.

Not forever, just to defeat.
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2015-12-08 14:02  

#4  Re. ROE - we delude ourselves when we attempt to eliminate all collateral damage; a quicker, more brutal war actually benefits most, as the total casualties on both sides end up lower. Example 1) Sherman's Georgia campaign broke the South. Example 2) Nuclear bombs ended WW II without invasion of the home islands. The path we are following just leads to low grade war, forever.
Posted by: Glenmore   2015-12-08 13:58  

#3  It's easy to say one 'did' a poll.
For the first time in CNN/ORC polling, a majority of Americans (53%) say 1) the U.S. should send ground troops to Iraq or Syria to fight ISIS. At the same time, 6-in-10 2) disapprove of the President's handling of terrorism and 68% say 3) America's military response to the terrorist group thus far has not been aggressive enough.

1) NO
2) Yes
3) Yes

There's my poll. Don't send men people when you can send machines.
Posted by: Skidmark   2015-12-08 13:30  

#2  Fred for President! Or at least Secretary of War.
Posted by: SteveS   2015-12-08 13:07  

#1  Fred's comments make sense but I think everybody knows it isn't going to happen that way.
Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305   2015-12-08 12:39  

00:00