Ground Troops

[Horus]

Apparently 57% of Americans do now. Scary times we live in.

[ElectionsGuy]

Absolutely not. People are under the impression that if we send American troops there it will make terrorism go away. Not to mention, ISIS wants a "holy war", and we could give it to them! Its an absolute trap. Our presence will just made radical Islamic terrorists more angry and more motivated by violence. I guarantee if we go full scale war the lefties who support it right now will be regretting it years later.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

I don't find it scary that 57% of Americans do. Americans have no knowledge of any issues, especially foreign policy. I find it scary that several Atlas users concurred in that thread. This is a needed poll. Probably the most important poll outside of Update that I'm seeing in several months.

I echo ElectionsGuy's sentiments as reasoning. I don't feel like I'm just being an ideologue in opposing it. It's just common sense.

[politicus]

Americans have no knowledge of any issues

A bit harsh, they know a lot about football, baseball and NASCAR.

[TDAS04]

No.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Americans have no knowledge of any issues

A bit harsh, they know a lot about football, baseball and NASCAR.

I wish they did!

[Suburbia]

No. Airstrikes, Airstrikes, Airstrikes.

[Frodo]

No -we do not have the patience for the sort of campaign (with conventional ground troops) that would be required to destroy the Islamic State.  And I doubt my fellow Americans have any idea what they are talking about, or what they are getting themselves into.  If they knew, they would stick with President Obama's current strategy of using airstrikes coupled with Special Operations forces, along with trainers for the Iraqi army.  It is working.    

[Lief 🗽]

Yes, I do.

[IceSpear]

Undecided. Lean no for now.

[free my dawg]

Americans have no knowledge of any issues

A bit harsh, they know a lot about football, baseball and NASCAR.

It's not football. It's le handegg.

[Beet]

No- I have little doubt that we could defeat ISIS, but what then? We're stuck in another potential quagmire until a political solution is found.

[TNF]

I am opposed to U.S. ground troops being deployed anywhere, for any reason.

[Middle-aged Europe]

I prefer sending Kurdish and Iraqi (or Jordanian and Bahraini ones, for that matter) ground troops to fight ISIS.

American ones... meh, maybe as a last resort if Baghdad and Erbil were about to fall. But I would be highly conflicted over this.

[Mr. Smith]

Hell no, give the Kurds,  Iraqis, Turks, Jordanians, Iranians, Bahranians and other forces the money to do it themselves...we've been doing this "Police the World" BS for far too long.

[Sol]

Yes, but more for the purposes of saving the remaining Yazidis, Armenians, and Assyrians from IS's genocide than actually "fighting terrorism."

[politicus]

Hell no, give the Kurds,  Iraqis, Turks, Jordanians, Iranians, Bahranians and other forces the money to do it themselves...we've been doing this "Police the World" BS for far too long.

The ISIS threat would be a good case for providing the UN with an actual army (financed by a Tobintax or something similar) instead of relying on member states.

[Lambsbread]

Absolutely not. I've become increasingly mixed on airstrikes, however.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Emphatically not. Things would have to get much, much worse for me to reconsider this. We need to be getting out of the region, not getting more involved.

[Indy Texas]

Yes, but more for the purposes of saving the remaining Yazidis, Armenians, and Assyrians from IS's genocide than actually "fighting terrorism."

We didn't save them from the bloody Turks. Why should we save them from the savage Arab Mohammedans?

[Indy Texas]

I would let a million Iraqi and Syrian women and children be raped, tortured and burned alive before I consented to a single drop of American blood being shed there.

Whether this is a necessary or just war is beside the point.

America cannot fight a necessary, just war today because America chose to fight an unnecessary, unjust war twelve years ago. I lay that at the feet of the failed foreign policy of George W. Bush and those elements of the Republican Party that still believe in neoconservative nonsense.

The 57% who support such a thing can go over there and take a stab at it themselves, as far as I'm concerned.

And if I have to listen to that senile old fart John McCain whine anymore about how we need to help his neo-Nazi fascist friends in Ukraine take over the country, I'm going to vomit.

[Sol]

I would let a million Iraqi and Syrian women and children be raped, tortured and burned alive before I consented to a single drop of American blood being shed there.

What about WW2?

I hope you enjoy the complete murder and destruction of the Yazidi people.

[Clarko95 📚💰📈]

...stick with President Obama's current strategy of using airstrikes coupled with Special Operations forces, along with trainers for the Iraqi army.  It is working.    

^^^

But also this:

I prefer sending Kurdish and Iraqi (or Jordanian and Bahraini ones, for that matter) ground troops to fight ISIS.

American ones... meh, maybe as a last resort if Baghdad and Erbil were about to fall. But I would be highly conflicted over this.

[Deus Naturae]

I remember seeing a report a few weeks after we started bombing (over eight months ago at this point...time really does fly) about Kurdish forces had already witnessed US ground troops. Most likely they've already been deployed and the Kurds have since shut about it since they're on the same side and have received assistance from the U.S.

[stegosaurus]

Yes. Reducing our military presence in the region was a mistake in the first place.