Post your SPECIFIC alternatives to current ISIS approach here

#128
#128
YorkVol said:
True but that would be the point.
Click to expand...

Right, but it isn't like this hasn't been a goal for years. Many countries around the world as willing to pay lip service, few are willing to do the heavy lifting, truly commit, or dedicate the resources needed to make such a coalition or extended endeavor possible.
 
#130
#130
PKT_VOL said:
Right, but it isn't like this hasn't been a goal for years. Many countries around the world as willing to pay lip service, few are willing to do the heavy lifting, truly commit, or dedicate the resources needed to make such a coalition or extended endeavor possible.
Click to expand...
Yep that's the problem mostly because everyone feared losing the oil. The over supply of oil now means there may be a real opportunity to put leverage on gulf states and others in the area to step up. The question is will anyone take the lead?
 
#132
#132
lawgator1 said:
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.
Click to expand...

1. Cut all funding/aid/military support to Saudi Arabia and Israel.
2. Bring all troops home and put them on the US/Mexican border.
3. Abolish the Patriot Act
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#133
#133
YorkVol said:
Yep that's the problem mostly because everyone feared losing the oil. The over supply of oil now means there may be a real opportunity to put leverage on gulf states and others in the area to step up. The question is will anyone take the lead?
Click to expand...

It would take a big, committed, and coordinated coalition to bring enough leverage to make the gulf states allies in a way that we would want. Even then, it would only be temporary, begrudgingly, and the minimum they could skate by with.
 
#136
#136
YorkVol said:
Paris attacks: President Xi Jinping to step up battle against terror | World | News | Daily Express
Click to expand...

I don't doubt the facts but that story reads like a high school paper.

Love this part

Xi's comments have led to speculation that China is set to bomb the terrorists to oblivion in Iraq and Syria.

Russia has reportedly killed hundreds of fanatics since Vladimir Putin ordered airstrikes against ISIS in September.

The terror group's arms supplies are also said to have been cut off by relentless Russian bomber jets.
Click to expand...
 
#139
#139
My first recommendation to Obama would be to regularly attend the intelligence briefings that an entire team of people assemble for him daily.

Perhaps his strategy will be better. And, more importantly, he'll stop looking like a buffoon when he talks about ISIS. He's underestimated them from day one. Or at least played down their strengths.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#144
#144
I don't think there is a good answer to LG's question until enough countries decide to address the issue collectively. I'm including the governments of ME countries as well. If they'd get on board along with the Europeans and other parts of the civilized world I think a manageable solution could be arranged. As it stands now it's like spraying for roaches.... They just move to another apartment and hang out for a while and then move right back in.
 
#147
#147
lawgator1 said:
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.
Click to expand...


Remember the last time you used this rhetorical ploy? Believe it was the Iran nuclear deal.

Strange how you use this argument when you find yourself in a position of defending the indefensible. Then after alternatives or solutions are offered, you have the brass to project the failings of the President onto the responses to this line of questioning.

Like the Iranian deal, the President's actions here smack of indecision, half-hearted activity, and an absolute unwillingness to admit earlier errors in judgement.

If I were in Obama's shoes, then I would immediately move 1-2 divisions with appropriate air support into Iraqi Kurdistan in support of the political and military moves taking place afterwards.

Then we would transfer foreign aid from either the Palestinian Authority or Syria to Iraqi Kurdistan (From $700,000,000 to $1,000,000,000 depending on which useless "nation" is more deserving to lose their foreign aid.) to enhance their ability to fight ISIS. They have carried the brunt of the fighting and continue to demonstrate a national spirit and courage sorely lacking in most of their Iraqi countrymen.

Next move would be to designate Kurdistan a Major Non-Nato Ally, granting it enhanced power and priority to receive military technology and surplus arms from the United States.

The President should then declare support for a free and independent Kurdistan and promise American recognition of the fact should the Kurds ever choose to break off from the rest of Iraq.

The offensive action would be Kurdish directed and led, with American forces in a supporting role on the ground and providing the necessary air support for the attacks. What should be envisioned here is a more-modern variant of our work with the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan at the start of OEF.

The Rules of Engagement would be the same as those applied to the Germans and the Japanese in World War II, with the exception being that the Geneva Convention would not apply to those fighting for ISIS. It would be total war with a policy of unconditional surrender applied to the enemy.

The goal should be, for once, to fight to win in the quickest manner possible with the fewest casualties possible to our troops and allies. A wide latitude should be granted to those closest to the ground to engage in combat operations against ISIS, as this will be the best means to ensure both the safe return of the vast majority of our fighting force and complete success in destroying the territorial ambitions of this enemy.

In short, is time to go Jacksonian on ISIS.

If we aren't willing to engage in total war against this enemy, then we might as well follow the advice of some libertarians and just leave the region entirely. The half-assed effort by President Obama has yielded half-assed results. More of the same will only yield more of the same and is merely a waste of time, resources and effort.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top