Post your SPECIFIC alternatives to current ISIS approach here

[IPleadInsanity]

First thing Obama should do is step aside and turn the problem over to others more qualified to make decisions of this nature. Let our forces simply join NATO under other leadership. If you can't help don't hinder.

 

[n_huffhines]

This strikes me as taking a "hands off" approach to a roach infestation. What do you think ISIS will accomplish if left alone in the ME? With that success do you think they'll be limited to just the ME?

I do think we need to try and get this Muslim "silent majority" we're always hearing about as involved with helping us battle extremists as much as possible.

Look at what ISIS has become because of our involvement. We essentially paved the way for their existence. I don't trust us to resolve this.

Y'all have far too much faith in government. They are not that good at managing peaceful communities here, why do we think they can manage resistant communities abroad? It's lunacy.

 

[hog88]

First thing Obama should do is step aside and turn the problem over to others more qualified to make decisions of this nature. Let our forces simply join NATO under other leadership. If you can't help don't hinder.

NO! US troops should never be under the command of anything but a US commander. I know it's happened but shouldn't.

 

[hog88]

Look at what ISIS has become because of our involvement. We essentially paved the way for their existence. I don't trust us to resolve this.

Y'all have far too much faith in government. They are not that good at managing peaceful communities here, why do we think they can manage resistant communities abroad? It's lunacy.

Way to late in the game now for us not to be involved.

 

[LouderVol]

1. As president get a gathering of all the world's major players. Get a consensus that we need to work together to solve this. Pretty much everyone is acting individually as it is. Get a rules of operation laid out, when is it ok to put civilians at risk, how prisoners are treated, wounded etc etc. Geneva Convention seems reasonable to me.
2. Let the "host" countries know who is willing to do what. US, x number of troops, Russia, Y number of troops, the french are bringing the champagne to toast at the end of it. But make it clear that you take all the help or you get none of it. So Syria isn't just Russia's problem, Iraq isn't just ours.
3. Give them an ultimatum, allow this to happen or get run over. at this point we aren't making friends or playing nice or what is fair. If Assad plays ball he keeps his power, if the Sauds raise a stink they get cleaned out. This has to be a complete buy in/acceptance of what is going to happen.
4. Once the big guys are all on board, how ever many that is, take your case to the UN. Get an international backing of this. Shouldn't be a problem with the major players involved and the host countries in line.
5. Once the world is largely behind it, formulate an actual strategy with actual deadlines and targets. IMO, it breaks down as the following. 1. Wide spread targeting of ISIS targets in all nations by all parties. focus on the command structure. This goes on for 6 months 2. Occupation, lets call it what it needs to be. 6 months to a year of this. Hunting down of the remaining pieces. this is where the blood gets spilled. Civilians will die in this. that has to be accepted, but limited, in this action. This is a total war situation. no one walks away clean. again this has to be accepted and moved past before we ever get started. We don't make distinctions on tribal lines. 3. Rebuild, and re-education. 5 years. Put the locals back in charge, get things running. Think Germany and Japan post WWII. We don't do the rebuild, the people do. don't force our ideas on the people, don't allow foreign companies to move in and take over. make sure money is available for the locals to use. Have meetings with the people, have them sit down and tell us what they want, if it sounds reasonable give it to them, and make them debate with each other. There has to be a discussion at the local level, that doesn't involve a sword or gun. Bridge gaps, make them work together on projects. Make sure the locals are part of all combat operations, make them responsible for their actions, and hold ourselves accountable.
6. Phase out. After the rebuild start pulling out. Leave the special forces in the area. At this point and for a while after we act as the local countries muscle. we have to make it clear that any violent dissent will not be tolerated. But we also have to ensure that those we leave in charge are also toeing the line. This will likely involve regime changes and shutting down rebellions. again no one walks away clean from this.

At both the international level and local level there has to be some joint coordination. IDK if thats Russian commanders leading American troops (at what level of command idk, because you have to keep some level of it the same. strategy vs tactics). Same at the local level. Make the Sunni's help rebuild Kurdish lands, make Shiites help Sunnis. have them work side by side, make them see the other has some value. again a continuing discussion has to be a part of this. at no point can it be a bunch of individuals working together. this has to be a team. we all come home or no one does.

 

[hndog609]

Look at what ISIS has become because of our involvement. We essentially paved the way for their existence.

And this observation does what do address the current situation? I was assuming the question about what to do didn't involve use of a time machine.

 

[n_huffhines]

Way to late in the game now for us not to be involved.

This is only true if we have a way of achieving good outcomes with our involvement.

If it were as easy as kicking ass and taking names, this would have all been done a long time ago. It's not that. It's top-down government control of a huge region on the other side of the world.

I've been told I live in fantasy land a hundred times on this message board, but JFC, people...

 

[n_huffhines]

And this observation does what do address the current situation? I was assuming the question about what to do didn't involve use of a time machine.

It helps to understand how we shouldn't address it.

If you are wondering what my thoughts are on addressing it, you can read this thread.

 

[IPleadInsanity]

NO! US troops should never be under the command of anything but a US commander. I know it's happened but shouldn't.

This is the first time in the history of the USA that our troops are safer under the control of anyone except the CIC of the USA, but sadly this is the case.

 

[n_huffhines]

Show me we can win a war on drugs within our own borders and maybe I'll believe people when you when they say we can win a war on terror, worldwide.

Show me we can protect our own borders, and maybe I'll believe people when they say we can win a war on terror, worldwide.

 

[hog88]

Show me we can win a war on drugs within our own borders and maybe I'll believe people when you when they say we can win a war on terror, worldwide.

Show me we can protect our own borders, and maybe I'll believe people when they say we can win a war on terror, worldwide.

We have to have the will to do any of the above first. All can be done.

 

[carlos86]

My detailed plan to fight ISIS:

1) NATO forms an Allied Expeditionary Force with 2 Allied Corps. 1 Corps = 40,000 men. The main Coalition countries would be the U.S. UK, France, Poland, Canada, Australia, Belgium, and the Kurds. The Kurds already nuber 150,000 men and woman. They are well trained and experienced. They just need weapons ammo and equipment. Insert both Corps into Kurdistan (Northern Iraq) The mission would be to conduct offensive counterterrorism and counterinsurgency operations against ISIS and push them out of the city of Mosul and out of Northern Iraq.

2)Increase the number of Air to ground attack aircraft in the region. As of right now the U.S. has conducted 2,000 airstrikes against ISIS this year. That is 5 airstrikes a day. I would increase that to 54 a day. that comes out to 18,414 sorties and airstrikes a day. That number can increase or decrease as targets become available.

3)Russian and Assad get to control of Western, Eastern and Southern Syria. They have to secede Northern Syria to the Kurds (I'll get to that soon) Russia has to agree to keep Assad on a tight leash.

4) The Sykes–Picot Agreement that was signed at the end of WWI has to be corrected. The must get their Independence. Kurdistan would include All of Northern Iraq and Northern Syria.

5)ISIS is a psychological enemy too and the best way to beat them psychological enemy is to film and publish every defeat they suffer on every western cable outlet and all over twitter and facebook.

 

[Grand Vol]

Show me we can win a war on drugs within our own borders and maybe I'll believe people when you when they say we can win a war on terror, worldwide.

Show me we can protect our own borders, and maybe I'll believe people when they say we can win a war on terror, worldwide.

The first is not a clear answer/goal.

The second is entirely achievable and more realistic depending on the border being secured. If we are talking Mexico, that's a political mess from the powers that be that don't want it secured. The capability is there, although expensive. Yet politicians want to let the sleeping dogs lie specifically.

 

[n_huffhines]

The first is not a clear answer/goal.

The second is entirely achievable and more realistic depending on the border being secured. If we are talking Mexico, that's a political mess from the powers that be that don't want it secured. The capability is there, although expensive. Yet politicians want to let the sleeping dogs lie specifically.

Neither is "winning the war on terror", which is part of my point.

The fact that border security is achievable and we don't have it, helps to illustrate my point. Government sucks. Don't trust them to fix this.

 

[MG1968]

Specific approach?

Let Russia deal with what goes on in Syria. The US should stop material support of Syrian opposition groups.

Let Turkey and the Kurds deal with Iraq. The US should continue material support of known and reliable (most of the time) allies.

Let the rest of the Islamic world (all those supposed "moderates" out there) deal with the spread of radical ideologies in their own countries.

The US should also work together with it's allies to stem the migration of militants across national borders. They should also begin a keen law-enforcement focus on institutions known to be hotbeds of radical Islamism.

The US should also step up cyber attacks against ISIS. It's stunning to see how easy it is for them to propagate via social media. I don't think the US should work with a group like Anonymous (they probably wouldn't accept the help, either) but more has to be done to limit IS' outreach through the internet.

 

[lawgator1]

1. As president get a gathering of all the world's major players. Get a consensus that we need to work together to solve this. Pretty much everyone is acting individually as it is. Get a rules of operation laid out, when is it ok to put civilians at risk, how prisoners are treated, wounded etc etc. Geneva Convention seems reasonable to me.
2. Let the "host" countries know who is willing to do what. US, x number of troops, Russia, Y number of troops, the french are bringing the champagne to toast at the end of it. But make it clear that you take all the help or you get none of it. So Syria isn't just Russia's problem, Iraq isn't just ours.
3. Give them an ultimatum, allow this to happen or get run over. at this point we aren't making friends or playing nice or what is fair. If Assad plays ball he keeps his power, if the Sauds raise a stink they get cleaned out. This has to be a complete buy in/acceptance of what is going to happen.
4. Once the big guys are all on board, how ever many that is, take your case to the UN. Get an international backing of this. Shouldn't be a problem with the major players involved and the host countries in line.
5. Once the world is largely behind it, formulate an actual strategy with actual deadlines and targets. IMO, it breaks down as the following. 1. Wide spread targeting of ISIS targets in all nations by all parties. focus on the command structure. This goes on for 6 months 2. Occupation, lets call it what it needs to be. 6 months to a year of this. Hunting down of the remaining pieces. this is where the blood gets spilled. Civilians will die in this. that has to be accepted, but limited, in this action. This is a total war situation. no one walks away clean. again this has to be accepted and moved past before we ever get started. We don't make distinctions on tribal lines. 3. Rebuild, and re-education. 5 years. Put the locals back in charge, get things running. Think Germany and Japan post WWII. We don't do the rebuild, the people do. don't force our ideas on the people, don't allow foreign companies to move in and take over. make sure money is available for the locals to use. Have meetings with the people, have them sit down and tell us what they want, if it sounds reasonable give it to them, and make them debate with each other. There has to be a discussion at the local level, that doesn't involve a sword or gun. Bridge gaps, make them work together on projects. Make sure the locals are part of all combat operations, make them responsible for their actions, and hold ourselves accountable.
6. Phase out. After the rebuild start pulling out. Leave the special forces in the area. At this point and for a while after we act as the local countries muscle. we have to make it clear that any violent dissent will not be tolerated. But we also have to ensure that those we leave in charge are also toeing the line. This will likely involve regime changes and shutting down rebellions. again no one walks away clean from this.

At both the international level and local level there has to be some joint coordination. IDK if thats Russian commanders leading American troops (at what level of command idk, because you have to keep some level of it the same. strategy vs tactics). Same at the local level. Make the Sunni's help rebuild Kurdish lands, make Shiites help Sunnis. have them work side by side, make them see the other has some value. again a continuing discussion has to be a part of this. at no point can it be a bunch of individuals working together. this has to be a team. we all come home or no one does.

If the broad outlines of what you suggest was doable, it would have happened already. Russia and China are not going to let the US simply "take over" the ME and run a coalition that involves that level of military commitment. That is especially so in Syria.

 

[lawgator1]

Specific approach?

Let Russia deal with what goes on in Syria. The US should stop material support of Syrian opposition groups.


Give up on Syria? So that the refugee problem is worsened? I don't think so. If anything, that will make the ISIS situation worse, and give them a solid geographic stronghold.

Let Turkey and the Kurds deal with Iraq. The US should continue material support of known and reliable (most of the time) allies.

I am tempted to agree. But isn't it the argument of the GOP that the premature abandonment of Iraq by Obama is largely to blame for this?

I mean, that's a silly argument. But they've kind of hemmed themselves into a corner on it. Hard to see the GOP on board with less Iraq involvement.


Let the rest of the Islamic world (all those supposed "moderates" out there) deal with the spread of radical ideologies in their own countries.

I can see putting the screws to them and suggesting that, should a radical from one of their countries engage in an attack, we might not readily distinguish between a radical Egyptian member of ISIS versus just a radical Egyptian.

Basically, let them know that we will hold them accountable for their own citizens, so they need to step up their own efforts to halt the spread.


The US should also work together with it's allies to stem the migration of militants across national borders. They should also begin a keen law-enforcement focus on institutions known to be hotbeds of radical Islamism.

That's a little vague. If you mean stop the Syrian refugee tide, I think you are risking quite the humanitarian crisis. Anyone notice that I believe its all but one of the governors of the states saying they will oppose Syrian refugees is Republican?

That's despicable partisanship on the part of the GOP, and illegal to boot.



The US should also step up cyber attacks against ISIS. It's stunning to see how easy it is for them to propagate via social media. I don't think the US should work with a group like Anonymous (they probably wouldn't accept the help, either) but more has to be done to limit IS' outreach through the internet.

As to the last, I suspect you are right and that it is an ongoing battle to stay one step ahead of each other on the use of social media to communicate and intercept messages.

 

[MG1968]

LG, I'm not worried about stepping on GOP toes. They've helped create the problem, they should help deal with it without screaming for tens of thousands of boots on the ground. I'm sick of hawkish blowhards like McCain and Graham getting all the face time.

I also think you misunderstand my take on the refugee crisis. I don't think all of them, or even most of them, are militants. But they need to be vetted, especially the ones that are set to come to the US.

 

[FLVOL_79]

So liberals keep saying muzzies wouldn't be bad if it werent for global warming, lack of jobs, lack of hugs and pats on the back for being muzzies.

So I propose this:

Every registered democrat act as a surrogate family for muslim refugees, regardless of where they come from. Provide them shelter, hugs, empathy, sympathy, and good old fashioned American kindness! Radical islam will be defeated!










Or at least liberalism.

 

[hog88]

If the broad outlines of what you suggest was doable, it would have happened already. Russia and China are not going to let the US simply "take over" the ME and run a coalition that involves that level of military commitment. That is especially so in Syria.

So far you (I'm assuming you have the proper intelligence reports) have discounted every proposed plan of action except Obama's. What do you know that the rest of the world doesn't?

 

[mrorange211]

Specific approach?

Let Russia deal with what goes on in Syria. The US should stop material support of Syrian opposition groups.

Let Turkey and the Kurds deal with Iraq. The US should continue material support of known and reliable (most of the time) allies.

Let the rest of the Islamic world (all those supposed "moderates" out there) deal with the spread of radical ideologies in their own countries.

The US should also work together with it's allies to stem the migration of militants across national borders. They should also begin a keen law-enforcement focus on institutions known to be hotbeds of radical Islamism.

The US should also step up cyber attacks against ISIS. It's stunning to see how easy it is for them to propagate via social media. I don't think the US should work with a group like Anonymous (they probably wouldn't accept the help, either) but more has to be done to limit IS' outreach through the internet.

Let the Middle East deal with their own problems? ISOLATIONIST!!!!!

 

[ClearwaterVol]

Troops on the ground?

How many? Where, exactly? Mission, specifically?

More drone strikes?

How many? Of whom? Names, please.

Build a coalition?

Of whom, that isn't already in it? And what is the purpose?

Harsher rhetoric?

What good does that do? ISIS will suddenly see the error of their ways?



Be specific. That is the key.

This is an absolutely stupid thread. Certainly, the president and our government can be second guessed when the results of the "plan" are not good. If he is going to stand up there and act like a ***** when he gets criticized then he needs to resign. He's a president not a king.

BTW, you can put me in the category of someone that thinks O takes too much heat, but this he has earned.

 

[OrngeChkrboardVFL]

First, let me start by apologizing for the multiple quotes. Second, I'm currently deployed and sitting in military facility at a location in southwest Asia. Primary mission to provide and maintain the communication in and around the AOR to include the video/intel feeds from pilots in the sky to the Commanders that make target decisions.

No I do not know all of the facts. I do know that the people who are supposed to have all of the facts have yet to come up with a workable plan. And that is fair to criticize!

We are working everyday and every hour on that plan and it is working just slower than most would like.

We haven't even attempted to shut off their oil shipments which fund their movement. So yes we have been sitting around with our thumb up our collective asses.

We just recently took out a fuel depot in Syria with 116 fuel trucks. Other fuel/oil targets have already been taken out and more will be.

US military: Air strikes destroy 116 ISIS fuel trucks, sharing target info with France | Fox News

I am not a military expert or a Middle East one. I know our President is surrounded by them. I am sure multiple solutions have been presented to him. His present course of action is not working. For example, the day after the Paris attack, we shared intelligence with the French so they could bomb a training facility. Why the hell had we not already taken this out? That makes no sense. Furthermore, I think it's pretty clear that we shouldn't be accepting any of these refugees at this time.

After a target is acquired, intel must be completed to get the best bang for the buck. Times for most combatants present along with as little civilian casualty. Also, after the target is a go, it goes on a list of priority sites to destroy. We (just my location) are sending out about 200 sorties a week with about half of those being bombing missions. That's A LOT. The French wanted retaliation so we gave them some spots from the list.

They are blaming the President because he is ignoring a threat and then inviting it in without, seemingly, willing to do any of the work, or take responsibility for what may happen, or be transparent about his intentions.

Might be transparent about his intentions, but definitely not "ignoring" it. And, I promise you we are doing the work. I'm not pro Obama but we are working on whatever it is the powers at be have deemed necessary. And, we are putting bombs on target.

This is the first time in the history of the USA that our troops are safer under the control of anyone except the CIC of the USA, but sadly this is the case.

I'm not sure how you can come to this conclusion without having worked for both and making the determination. I for one, will never work for another country...ever. Perhaps to ease some minds on VolNation, I do want to say that our American presence out here is still very much in charge and bringing the pain to the bad guys. Granted, most of our guys (especially infantry or spec ops) are chomping at the bit to get boots on the ground and get after these chumps, but currently using the eye in the sky and precision seems to be the best path. Going door to door is very tricky, as we learned in Iraq. Everyone dresses the same, everyone walks around with an AK-47 and the kids are polite and tender hearted. With all due respect, the people calling for a nuke out here can f*** off. Some of the best guys I've ever met are Muslims with families out here and they would give you the shirt off their back.

 

[AirVol]

Any country that is buying cheap oil from ISIS should be dealt with whatever means. This will slow down their wealth tremendously.

Bomb the hell out of their oil fields and any trucks carrying this illegal oil. ( the US finally did this on Monday)

 

[LouderVol]

If the broad outlines of what you suggest was doable, it would have happened already. Russia and China are not going to let the US simply "take over" the ME and run a coalition that involves that level of military commitment. That is especially so in Syria.

you clearly didn't understand what I said. None of this is going to be easy or clean, or normal. If Russia has to have Syria, they get Syria. If we have to have Kurdistan we get Kurdistan. that is what is the problem right now. We are trying to maintain the sovereignty of nations that have lost all resemblance of control. so imo, that means they don't get to be nations. its going to be a fundamentally different. But if we are going to keep existing nations we make them (the locals) work together. so that they see themselves as Iraqi's instead of Kurds. No way we, the outside world, make that happen. But we can get the ball rolling.