Carrying a Little Stick
Degrade and Destroy ISIS…But Not for a Couple of Months
show comments
  • Kevin

    I figure there’s an even chance that in about two weeks Obama won’t give a fig about ISIS. Maybe it will take another couple of months for this if there’s a runoff In GA or LA for their Senate seats. He will have a lot more “flexibility” after the election.

    • Fat_Man

      Safe bet dude. 12:01 am November 5th.

  • Gene

    I really appreciate the analysis from our host, his colleagues and their minions, though I think they’ll eventually end up needing physical therapy to correct the trauma of bending so far over backwards to give the benefit of the doubt to our president. It seems obvious to me that he is not in any way prepared to do what it takes to degrade and destroy ISIS, and that all of these statements are political, i.e., an attempt to look like we’re doing something leading up to the elections. Watch: After those “few months,” our on-the-ground allies will be declared hopeless and that will be our excuse to go back to the usual policy of passivity.

  • Jacksonian_Libertarian

    ISIS is being blown way out of proportion. We shouldn’t get involved, let the Jihadists kill each other, this is exactly what we want.

    • Tom

      Yes, but do we really want ISIS to be on the borders of Persian Gulf, in control of Iraqi oil, and in a position to overrun Kuwait and push far enough into Saudi Arabia that the kingdom crumbles as the disparate factions try to grab what they can?
      I suggest that the answer is no.

      • FriendlyGoat

        Islam is going to need to defeat ISIL. We have to keep sending that message to everyone in Islam. YOU either control this thing or it will eat you. The USA is tired of it. Not only that, we’re infidels. anyway, and you Islamic smart-asses can figure out what you need to do. (No, I don’t like Mohammad any better whether the governments and the nations revere it—-or the radicals.)

        • Tom

          There is a space between “do nothing” and “do everything.” I simply suggest that, until we can tell the Arabs to drink their oil for all we care, that backing those who are against ISIS and its various counterparts will be necessary.
          Not saying that we shouldn’t be pointing out to them, subtly, that they need us a whole lot than we need them.

          • FriendlyGoat

            I don’t think most people in the USA understand HOW MUCH military action is required to clean out ISIL, Taliban, Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Hezbollah, Boko Haram, Al Qaeda, and whatever other nuts on a house to house basis in dozens of countries. Although we DO have interests, we need to pretend we seriously do not give a damn if the followers of Mohammad all drown in their own soup of profound ignorance. That may be the only way the sensible people are EVER consolidated in these places. YOU, Muslims, either control this sh*t or the beheaders are on your doorstep next. You’re going to have to start by questioning why all these radicals think THEY are following “the Prophet” and you other guys think you are too. “The Prophet” is the problem.

          • Tom

            See previous reply.

          • FriendlyGoat

            I saw it. Ask the American people what they want to do after you level with them HOW MUCH military action this all takes.

          • Tom

            Because, as we all know, the amount of USA military action required to render these guys no longer a real threat to our interests is the exact same as that which is required to clean them out.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Okay, and HOW MUCH is that? Permanent garrisons in how many countries? How much money and how many soldiers? (Let’s stop calling them boots, by the way.) There just has to be “more detail” than “blame Obama”.

          • Tom

            Repeated games of Blow-up-the-Horde. More expensive over the long-term, but all we’ll be able to stomach.
            You develop an army big enough to try and build a caliphate, then go and try to do it? The USN and USAF will blow you to bits.
            How many resources? Over the course of decades, hundreds of millions of dollars, thousands of soldiers, and no more permanent garrisons than we already have.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Was that hundreds of millions or hundreds of billions?

          • Tom

            Hundreds of millions dollars total over the course of decades.

          • FriendlyGoat

            We already exceeded that by a factor of perhaps a thousand in the last decade alone. A billion is a thousand million. Some people estimate our two official wars at a trillion (a million million) after we pay for the long-term care of the people we sent there. Hundreds of millions just doesn’t buy much.

          • Tom

            The wars cost that much because we dropped hundreds of thousands of troops at a time into them and kept them there for years. Shift to a “hammer and go home” model, and we don’t have that particular issue.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Isn’t that what we’re doing with airstrikes?

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.