How would YOU handle the ISIS terrorist organization if you were in the Oval Office?

[derby378]

I'm just curious. I haven't weighed in one way or the other, but I do fear being dragged into yet another undeclared war, seeing how swimmingly the last one went. But what is your option for handling and neutralizing ISIS that is reasonable?

[99Forever]

1. Stay the Hell out of it.

No more blood and treasure for human meat grinding War Machine.

[HERVEPA]

4. Very simplistic viewpoint.

[99Forever]

10. Occum's razor.

The simple answer is the correct one.

[derby378]

13. I'm afraid you got Occam's razor wrong, there...

I believe the original reads, "Among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected."

[99Forever]

36. Whatever.

Millions of lives and billions worth of resources at stake and you want to play word games. Deal me out.

[HERVEPA]

48. It's not playing games. It's called critical thinking.

There are consequences to doing something and to doing nothing.
POTUS needs to decided what gives most acceptable results.
And note, I am not a big defender of many of his policies.

[99Forever]

51. And you're the only one capable of "critical thinking."

Give me a break.

[HERVEPA]

58. No, I am saying words. and the correct use of them, matter.

[99Forever]

61. Elitist claptrap.

The subject is killing lots of people and you're worked up over that ?

Nice priorities you've got there.

[HERVEPA]

62. People will be killed in any case.

Again, sorry, you are not thinking critically

[99Forever]

92. I have zero idea what you mean by critically thinking but..

... I sure as hell know immoral justifications when I hear them. This is the same kind of crap George W Bush used to justify his invasion of Iraq.

Albert Einstein defined insanity ias doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

[backwoodsbob]

99. hope your S.O. does the bills

you have zero thinking ability

[99Forever]

100. Nice.

Insults will surely win me over to your fucked up world view.

[LordGlenconner]

71. Yes, but what about "occum's" razor?

[NuclearDem]

50. That's not what Occam's Razor is at all.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

56. I love Occam's razor but it is used for explanations and not problem solving./NT

[Lint Head]

63. Occum's razor can lead to a nasty cut to the throat. The beheadings were the "simple thing"

that ISIS chose and it is leading to a very complicated reaction. We have satellites that can image the license plate on a car yet cannot locate the headquarters of ISIS. Sounds like the simple solution is one step away from that. ISIS has stated that they want the world dominated by their distorted religious beliefs. My opinion is that they will attempt a destructive act in this country. We should not wait to find out. I would know the "how" if I knew the exact technological capabilities that our military had. But Occum's Razor says the simple solution is to keep military technology secret.

[99Forever]

86. Saudia Arabia beheaded 19 people in the last month. In public.

When do we start bombing there?

[Thinkingabout]

102. Were the 19 Americans?

[JoePhilly]

103. Elitist claptrap!!

This sub thread is absolutely hilarious.

The guy trying to throw out Occum's razor later accusing some one else of "Elitist Claptrap".

[jeff47]

22. Correction

No more US blood and treasure.

Does Iraqi blood count?

[neverforget]

112. I see US treasure being expended daily in Iraq by the dropping of bombs, use of fuel for those

aircraft and the logistical needs of those forces in and outside of Iraq supporting this war. There is US treasure being expended and statistically, we are going to incur casualties aka blood.

[jeff47]

113. Could you at least bother reading the post I was replying to first?

That way you might actually have a clue about what's being discussed. Hint: He's not talking about a situation where US bombs anyone.

[neverforget]

114. I did bother reading it thus my response.

[jeff47]

115. Your response was about us bombing. What he explicitly rejected.

So either you didn't bother to read, or you made an utterly incoherent reply.

But hey, since you're stalking my posts, might as well reply even when it's incoherent.

[neverforget]

116. Sorry you feel that way. I'm trying to have a debate but you think I'm stalking you.

I didn't even realize I had responded to you in this thread and the other one. At least be a gentlemen when debating instead of being a jerk

[jeff47]

117. Again, debate would require you to actually read the thread.

The poster rejected bombing, wanting no more "blood or treasure" for Iraq.

I asked about the Iraqis that would die from that.

You then said the US would lose blood and treasure for the bombing that isn't happening in this scenario.

And now you're pretending it's a debate when you're talking about a completely different scenario. And pointing out that you're talking about something different is apparently offensive.

[neverforget]

118. You don't like having your views challenged. I get that. But at least be civil when debating someone

[jeff47]

119. Talking to a mirror?

The posts are right there. Bombing is explicitly rejected. So your reply makes no sense. You're asking "what if Russia invades Alaska?!" and pretending that's part of the debate.

You're in a hole. Stop digging.

[neverforget]

120. You're right. I misread the post.

I didn't get much sleep today. Sorry for the misunderstanding

[randome]

2. Shut your eyes tight and make it go away!

It seems many think the job of Commander-In-Chief is easy. I know Bush, Junior thought so. Obama? No. He wouldn't be doing this without crunching all the numbers and agonizing over them.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[Puzzledtraveller]

3. Get out of the ME

Completely and forever.

[randome]

8. We can't. The Eastern world and the Western world are more connected than before.

Wars don't occur in a vacuum. I think many overlook what is happening here. This is a clash of cultures that had its roots long before Bush, Junior came to pass.

The Internet connects us for good and bad and this clash will continue until it settles down of its own accord.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[Hugabear]

67. Why do we care so much about what goes on in the Middle East, but Africa not so much?

Why is it only when there are bad things happening to people in the Middle East that we decide we must launch a Crusade to rescue them? When people were/are being slaughtered in Africa, nobody really seems to give a shit. Oh, sure, there are some who may stand up and complain that something should be done, but we don't really do anything.

[randome]

77. What Crusade? We're not trying to convert anyone.

I wish we were more involved in Africa. I wish we used human rights as a club to dominate the entire goddamned world! But we don't. All I know is that ISIS needs to be stopped and if Obama has weighed the costs and the pros and cons, I'm fine with his assessment.

Absent evidence that he's a complete buffoon, that is.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[Hugabear]

82. When do we go into North Korea?

The North Korean regime is responsible for countless more deaths than ISIS could ever dream of, yet nobody in the world is clamoring for air strikes against Kim Jong Un.

Why not let the Arab world handle ISIS? They are the ones who are most directly threatened by their 'we are the one true caliphate' message.

[derby378]

98. Hugabear raises an inconvenient yet very important point

Victor Cha covers the logistic headaches of going to war with North Korea in his book, The Impossible State. I'd love to see that regime toppled and replaced with something more humane and reality-based, but that's easier said than done for a number of reasons I can't do justice to here.

[amandabeech]

108. That is an excellent question. n/t

[FrodosPet]

18. And prohibit immigration of Middle Eastern peoples

Can we expel all the Muslims as well, JUST to help ensure that what happens over there does not affect us?



Even Senators Warren and Sanders agree - ISIL has GOT to be stopped. However they ended up where they are, we CAN and MUST do something about them.

[atreides1]

57. What is an acceptable cost?

How much treasure and blood? How many casualties from collateral damage? When does the killing stop?

[randome]

78. No one ever knows the answers to those questions.

What do you want, a spreadsheet with numbers? It's a military operation. Things can go the way we hope or they can go terribly wrong. Obama is not making a spurious decision here.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[GeorgeGist]

106. Don't be naive.

There is no law that says we must do something about ISIS.

[FrodosPet]

110. Many of the most progressive Senators are saying the same thing

Are Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren sellouts to the M.I.C. as well?

[1StrongBlackMan]

79. IOWs ...

Shut your eyes tight and make it go away!

[Puzzledtraveller]

81. it won't go away, even with our intervention

that's the problem.

[TheCowsCameHome]

5. I don't know, but

the last thing I would to is tell the world how I intended to defeat them.

Why not just pass out copies of the play book?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

9. Maybe he's playing three dimensional chess and will do something completely different...

Maybe he's playing three dimensional chess and will do something completely different than what's he saying.

[treestar]

94. Transparency

He's finally learned from Eddie that he has to tell us everything.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

6. Make them some chocolate chip cookies

And ask them to join in singing Kumbaya.

[treestar]

95. Wasn't that duck dynasty guy going to take care of this?

Go over and convert them to Jesus, that's what he was going to do.

Problem solved.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

105. I wish he would

One problem or another would be solved.

[dilby]

7. Easy, let the Middle East deal with their problem.

The US being involved will not resolve the issue and if anything it will only compound the problem and produce another group worse than ISIS.

[RKP5637]

21. I have no idea what I would do, but I share your same concern, that another will

spring up worse than ISIS. We are the outsiders to that area, seen as invaders. To me, it's a thankless job. Also, why do we always have to be the police force of the world. That all said, I don't know what I would do. As usual, it's a damn catch 22. Out country has so many serious problems unfixed. While we're preoccupied there, who knows what will spring up here. Sh** happens.

[fadedrose]

70. I know what you should do, read #69 below....nt

[RKP5637]

83. Thanks! n/t

[Donald Ian Rankin]

29. That's the same as "let them get on with murdering vast numbers of innocent people"

Which is not necessarily the greater evil.

But the possibilities are "the US leads efforts to deal with ISIS" or "ISIS goes unchecked"; it is misleading to imply that someone else may deal with them.

[dilby]

33. Because we all know they are taking the jobs Americans should be doing.

ISIS killing innocent people is no different then us going in there and dropping bombs on women and children so your argument has no merit with me.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

37. Two massive differences.

1) Murder is not the same thing as negligent manslaughter.

2) Killing a number of innocent people in the tens or low hundreds is not the same thing as killing a number of innocent people in the thousands or tens of thousands.

[dilby]

44. Both are killing because they feel the need to bring their idea of government to Iraq.

Sorry but let the Middle East deal with their problem, it's not our job and it's not worth a single Americans life.

[derby378]

75. The problem is that it has already cost American blood

And I don't think al-Qaeda ever hunted the Yezidis as ruthlessly as ISIS has. Not Americans, I know, but these thugs don't strike me as the type that would be satisfied with some sham caliphate.

[dilby]

76. The Cartels in Mexico are just as ruthless as ISIS.

But they are not threatening American Oil interests so we don't care when they cut the heads off of innocent people or kill Americans. This is all about protecting American corporations that are making a killing off the oil in Iraq and has nothing to do with protecting innocent women and children as it's being sold.

[derby378]

31. "Better the devil you know..."

This would have been the proper way for Bush 43 to handle Saddam Hussein, as our nation has learned to its sorrow.

"But Saddam tortured people..." Yeah, but so does North Korea, China, Uzbekistan, Mexico - and gee, America!

[MannyGoldstein]

11. The long game

I don't know, but I'd try to fix the thing over the long haul rather than blow stuff up so Fox News stops whining. A few things come to mind:

1. Involve the UN. This might be difficult after what we did in Libya, but ultimately it should be restored to being a great institution.
2. Help people in that part of the world to lead better lives - is that helping with housing, food, education? I don't know. But when people's lives are a shambles, trouble emerges.
3. End our dependence on fossil fuels. This fuels much of the ME insanity.

[CJCRANE]

12. +1

[RKP5637]

25. +1, n/t

[jwirr]

64. Good sumary.

[Maven]

84. +1

[former9thward]

14. I would shut down the world's biggest embassy in Baghdad.

And I would impose a travel ban on Americans going to Iraq or Syria. Let the people of that region solve their problems on their own. Both Syria and Iraq are false countries created after WW I by the British and French. They need to devolve to governable areas.

[jeff47]

28. And the people ethnically cleansed while that happens?

what of them?

[former9thward]

32. Do you favor entering the many countries of Africa

where ethnic cleansing is going on? If not, why? How many countries do you want our military to take over?

[jeff47]

38. I want them to take over zero countries.

I would like our foreign policy efforts to attempt to steer those areas towards the groups least interested in slaughtering everyone else.

The form of that steering depends on the country. We'd use economic, diplomatic and military means as necessary. For ISIS in particular, bombing to weaken their military forces coupled with training for the Kurds and to a lesser extent, the Iraqis. Meanwhile attempt to build up an alternative for Sunnis to align themselves with.

Will people die? Yep. But fewer should die than if we do nothing.

So, again, what of the Iraqis ethnically cleansed while we ignore ISIS? If their lives aren't worth our intervention, just say so.

[former9thward]

93. In the long run and probably in the short run it will cost more lives.

As a interventionist you disagree. I am not in that category. I am a student of history and U.S. intervention has rarely been beneficial for the people. "Saving lives" has always been the slogan for intervention. Every country doing it uses it.

Training? Please. We have been training the Iraqis for 11 years now. Under both Bush and Obama. A failure. What is going to make it different now? Same as Afghanistan. We have been "training" there for 13 years. A total failure. The minute the U.S. leaves the Taliban will take over.

[jeff47]

109. If you're such a student of history

how has non-intervention worked at stopping the ethnic cleansing you decry in Africa?

Training? Please. We have been training the Iraqis for 11 years now.

Hence "to a lesser extent" in front of that. The Iraqi government forbade training of the Kurds, and that's why ISIS was able to push them back.

Also, you pretend "training" is the only thing I said. There were several other things to be done along with that.

[former9thward]

124. We trained the Iraqi army.

And they ran at first sight of ISIS. What is your explanation of that?

[Scootaloo]

53. "Both Syria and Iraq are false countries created after WWI"

That's not only true, but is a major source of local support for IS - they have very publicly erased the borders between Iraq and Syria where they control it, literally bulldozing the lines away. The local people see it as less a devolution and more a return to how it should be.

The brutality of the IS regime is simply seen as a price to be paid for the return of a "natural" nation-state. And bombng these poeple isn't going to make them support IS any less.

[jwirr]

65. Anyone have a map of the preWWI ME?

[Scootaloo]

85. Several

All you have to do is google up the Ottoman empire circa 1900 or so.

here's one from 1855:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b8/1855_Colton_Map_of_Turkey,_Iraq,_and_Syria_-_Geographicus_-_TurkeyIraq-colton-1855.jpg

The gap in the south is the Arabian Desert region that was controlled by the Shammar tribe, south of them is Nejd, then the Rhub al Khali, or "empty quarter." All are nominally ottoman, though it exerted next to no direct control. Also lacking on the map are the two directly-controlled ottoman provinces on the Peninsula; Hejaz on hte west boast, and al hasa on the East.

Most of the little emirates - Qatar, Yemen, Oman, the princedoms that would form the UAE - these were independent of ottoman rule at the time, though were pretty much under british control as a sort of naval base pipeline between British India and egypt.

You cna learn more here: http://www.academia.edu/5269920/Mapping_and_Remapping_the_Arab_World-Part_2_Remapping

[jwirr]

87. Thank you. If I am not wrong about what I just looked at and read the ME has been the target of a

lot of outside interference long before we got there. And there does not look like there is any easy solution to a division of Iraq or Syria into a former state. No easy solution for the other ME countries to work with. But still I think these maps clearly show why outsiders cannot fix the problem.

[Scootaloo]

88. Contrary to modern belief, the chaos in the middle east is a recent thing

And it indeed stems entirely from Sykes-Picot, the agreement that split the ottoman empire between british and French "spheres of influence."

Prior to that, the ottomans had governed a stable middle east for over four hundred years.

Prior to the ottomans was a period of instability, brought on by the Mongol invasion of the middle east under Hulegu. Baghdad was sacked, everything West to the Sinai was taken (The Mameluks of Egypt were the first army to successfully repel the Mongols - them and malaria / west Nile)

before the Mongols, the middle east was not only stable, but was also the epicenter of western civilization. Of course it had its wars and conflicts, but it was dynastic tussling and local tribal skirmishes. No mass chaos. Even the Islamic conquest of the region in the 7th century was relatively swift and painless - prior to that the biggest conflicts in the region were Romans and Persians lobbing spears at one another over a no-man's land border.

So yeah, the current situation of chaos and crumbling states is a modern thing, and can be termed a European innovation to the region.

[earthside]

15. Don't make the same mistake as Bush/Cheney.

Bush elevated al Qaeda to a 'borderless state' with 'combatants' so that he could have his 'war'.

Al Qaeda was an organized criminal enterprise and should have been treated as such -- hunted down, killed or apprehended and prosecuted like the vermin they are.

Pres. Obama ought to be treating ISIL the same way -- murderers and thieves are criminals whether or not they use politics or religion as their excuse for their crimes.

[jeff47]

40. And that means doing what, specifically?

What should we do to treat ISIS as an organized criminal enterprise?

[jwirr]

66. Well my objection to the bush invasion was that we used the military for a criminal enterprise. I

wanted them to use police including the FBI, and international agencies. That was when we were looking for Bin Ladin and his group. But ISIS seems to be much larger than any group that law enforcement has ever tackled so I am not sure that would work with them.

[tularetom]

16. First I would call Senator McCain and ask him what he would do

And then I would direct my administration and staff to do the exact opposite of whatever he said.

Seriously, if I believed that ISIS represented no imminent threat to the United States, I wouldn't do anything. I don't consider the beheading of two journalists an imminent threat.

But if were convinced that the threat existed, I would seek congress's buy in to whatever solution I proposed, particularly dealing with the financial costs of said solution. I would request a blank check and carte blanche in the management of the response and I would do nothing without a recorded vote. I wouldn't want those douchebags to claim later that they were lied to and I wouldn't allow them to campaign on opposition to the program.

[jeff47]

41. And the Iraqis?

Seriously, if I believed that ISIS represented no imminent threat to the United States, I wouldn't do anything. I don't consider the beheading of two journalists an imminent threat.

According to Amnesty International, ISIS is conducting a fairly brutal ethnic cleansing campaign.

Is it not worth doing anything to stop that?

[tularetom]

52. It's not worth putting American troops in Iraq

American troops in Iraq is pretty much what caused the problem in the first place. Besides ISIS has a long way to go before they kill as many Iraqis as we already have.

We just aren't very good at this asymmetrical warfare stuff. We tend to have a pretty heavy handed approach to it and it always seems to result in a lot of collateral damage.

Yes, it's an unhappy situation and something should be done. And if ISIS can be stopped with aerial strikes or even drones, I'm all for it. But a massive American presence will do nothing but inflame the situation and it still probably won't have much of an effect on ISIS.

[99th_Monkey]

17. Get OUT of the ME, Invest in Solar, Wind & renewables at home

It is hight time we start rebuilding this country before it entirely falls apart.

Screw ISIS, it's all a shell game going after fossil fuels that should be obsolete by now.

[CakeGrrl]

20. With this Congress. Good luck with that. n/t

[RKP5637]

30. Yep, many in this congress are stupid, useless, conniving and out for greed. I can clearly

see why he doesn't go to them.

[99th_Monkey]

35. The OP question was about what POTUS should do, not Congress

In case you haven't noticed, this whole terrorist meme is a massive shell game to keep the US military industrial complex fat and happy. All those billion$ of our tax dollars are needed on the domestic front, to start rebuilding this once great nation before it entirely falls apart.

[gordianot]

19. As close as I will get Oval Office is the view from the gate.

Having never broken anything in Pottery Barn or voted for those who broke Iraq I am most grateful that is something I will not have to deal with personally. There is nothing reasonable about this quagmire it makes the War in Southeast Asia seem like a walk in the park.

So we are going to break some more things try to fix others and hope it all works out and the bill is not too high when we check out.

[MohRokTah]

23. Pretty much how Obama is doing it. eom

[moondust]

24. Same as the President.

Air power to stop the barbarians' advance and keep them at bay until local ground and air forces can get on their feet and take over the operation in their own defense.

This President seems to have the discipline and restraint to resist mission creep.

[librechik]

26. would tell all the Islamist states to get the f into the 21st century

or we will
stop buying their oil and switch to hemp.

And really mean it.

[Scootaloo]

49. Well, that's a good plan!

If they're all on the floor laughing their heads off at such a preposterous idea, they're not fighting.

[librechik]

89. if you think it's preposterous, then you know nothing about commercial hemp.

They may laugh, but if we did it, we're the ones who would be laughing at them.

[Scootaloo]

97. I know that it could not possibly meet the US' energy consumption

I also know there's a strong tendency by advocates to gratuitously overstate the usefulness of hemp, basically turning it from a plant into a godlike magical being, all as an attempt to cover the primary reason for hemp / marjuana advocacy.

No. Really, we could not grind enough seeds or brew enough biodiesel to make up for mideast oil, any more than we can do with corn, switchgrass, or any of these others.

Now maybe if you said "solar" that might be credible.

[Laelth]

27. IS isn't too big of a threat at the moment.

The extent to which IS is a threat, I discuss HERE. In all, I think that President Obama has handled this matter admirably.

-Laelth

[Donald Ian Rankin]

34. Pretty much what Obama is doing.

Try and encourage regional governments to fight ISIS on the ground.

Provide them with air support, intelligence and only-usable-for-this-purpose support, but be chary about handing out guns, training etc that could be used for other purposes later, or fall into ISIS's hands.

Avoid committing US ground troops.

Provide humanitarian aid to those displaced or fleeing.


This is not a good approach - it will be expensive, will probably result in in the US killing tens or hundreds of innocent people by mistake, and may well not stop ISIS killing hundreds, thousands or even tens of thousands of innocent people on purpose and displacing orders of magnitude more. But I think it's probably the least worst compromise available.

[LeftyMom]

39. Lean on our allies to stop funding them.

In the long term it would be wise fund secular education and media in the region, because right now a lot of the education materials and funding are wahhabist and a lot of the tv channels are sectarian and that's what's fueling a great deal of the animosity and violence. But right now I don't think we can intervene in that too much without mistrust, that really needs to be a longer term project.

But as far as Iraq specifically goes, there's currently a situation where the population is not evenly distributed over the oil wealth, and fighting over the areas that are is unfortunately inevitable. We're making a mistake in reading religion into that conflict as the primary motive, religion is a tool, there's a reason they're fighting in the areas where the oil is. For that matter the breakdown of Iraq's colonial borders into something that better represents the ethnic and religious divides is also inevitable, and dragging that out is not going to make that process any easier, let alone make it bloodless. Likewise we've set up this situation by propping up strongmen, because this created a situation where religion and resistance were comingled, and that's always a powerful mix. The fall of strongmen in the face of popular resistance is volatile but it's also inevitable and in the long run it's almost certainly for the good. The short run is going to be really fucking ugly and our involvement is likely to make it more so.

And of course we need to work on better energy sources, because resource wars won't end until the resource is less valuable.

[Xolodno]

42. Probably...

...tell Saudia Arabia, Qatar, et. al.

You created this mess with your heavy anti-western rhetoric, fundamentalist idealism, etc. so your populace would be mad at the West instead of getting pissed off at your ineptitude. So go fix it....or I'll start arming Iran covertly as they seem to be the only one's trying anything.

[benld74]

43. I would jump into my time machine go back to the 2000 election,,,,,,,

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

45. Considering our glorious accomplishments in the latest wars..I'd look at other ways

to be seen as a "strong leader".

[Bragi]

46. I'd announce that war funding will come from Israel military grants

If I wanted to get ME countries and their people onside with a new war in Iraq, I'd announce that funding for the war will come out of the military funding normally sent to Israel.

This would appeal to absolutely everyone in the ME, and signal that the US really does want their support from in this new mission. It would also appeal to fiscal conservatives at home.

As it stands, by not even mentioning Israel even once in his speech last night, President Obama signaled the new war is "business as usual".

[Scootaloo]

47. Couple things

1) expose Saudi links to the organization and threaten economic sanction against the kingdom unless they several such ties. We know that such ties exist, it's only Saudi Arabia's position as our other Shitty Little Client State in the region that protects them. After making this clear, lean on Amman, Dubai, Kuwait, these other places that are funneling money to Sunni extremists, not just for IS but globally. Freeze assets, threaten sanctions, basically take a hacksaw to the funding pipelines.

2) Encourage iran, Iraq, and Syria to work together against IS. I can't claim to have specifics, since I'm not intimately familiar with te minutae of politics between the three, gut I'm certain a deal could be reached. Fund and supply the Iraqi army only out of the three, but provide logistics to all three. Apply airstrikes where necessary, but importantly only with clearance from the nation where they are to be conducted.

3) As for Syria, absolutely do not start bombing over the border, at least without express clearance from Damascus. Demand some capitulations for US aid vs. ISIS; a timeline for elections, more transparency for weapons inspectors, shit like that. The US has never been squeamish about backing middle eastern dictators, there's no reason to get cold feet about it now I suppose.

Ideally, we would stop fueling the civil war in Syria, and we would let the Iraqis do their thing.The only trouble with the Iraqis is that they were very intentionally poorly trained; Americans trained the Iraqi military to be wholly reliant on technology only the Us could provide, thus ensuring a steady contract for the MIC, and a weak military (because the last thing the US wants is a strong military in a state other than Israel in the region)

[MineralMan]

54. I'm not in the Oval Office, nor is anyone on DU.

Given that, I have too little information on which to base a response. So, I won't post one. I'm not competent to make any decision regarding ISIS.

[fadedrose]

73. I'm not competent either, so I posted #69

[MineralMan]

74. Good idea!

[jwirr]

55. We - going all the way back the bush sr. - created this mess because we did not understand the

culture and when we did we did not care because we wanted the oil. I think the only way to fix what we broke is to let the countries of the ME try to settle it. And I admit that this may not happen easily because they have many distinct clashes in what they believe. It will be a battle for supremacy that will not be pretty. A lesson for those who think we have the right to rearrange the world to fit our needs. There are consequences.

That method leaves us with some real problems. ISIS is not going to leave us or our people in the ME alone. They get way too much publicity and in some cases money for hitting out at the USA. It is also their recruiting tool. It makes them look stronger and more important than they are.

This is one of those times when I for one feel like throwing my arms up in defeat.

[LordGlenconner]

59. Complain bitterly (and anonymously) on an internet message board.

[Marrah_G]

60. I would withdraw all troops from the ME.

Ongoing military actions there have not worked so far. In fact, they have made things worse. There is no logical reason to think they will work this time.

Stay out of all of it and invest all that money here at home.

[Reter]

68. I would just say we recognize Israel as a terrorist nation

That should make them leave us alone.

[fadedrose]

69. Would get help from Congress through YOU

Write to your Representative and State Senators and demand they produce a bill ASAP with debates and discussion, listing what the President may or may not do, boots on the ground or not, air strikes in Syria or anywhere else or not . . .funding for war HOW? And I want to watch the final vote on the bill on C-Span LIVE....

I don't want my President blamed for war crimes, or threat of impeachment if a plane is shot down, or other tragic things happen, without Congressional approval on the war strategy.

YOU help the President and send those emails. He would welcome their help and support because he, truthfully, does not have the heart of warlike President. If you remember, that's why we voted for him.

[SomethingFishy]

72. Some ideas...

First.. .STOP KILLING PEOPLE.

Second.. Instead of dropping bombs drop food. Instead of blowing shit up help people build an infrastructure. Schools, hospitals, farms..

Terrorism is like a weed. You cut one down and two more pop up. It must be destroyed at the root.

"Mmmm, If it's security you want, build a society no one wishes to attack you must"- Yoda

I posted an article that dropped like a stone. Obama's 1st term Counterterrorism Expert and others have already told us that the media is blowing the ISIS threat way out of proportion. Words like "farce" are being tossed around. Everyone is upset about the ISIS beheadings, as am I. However I am just as upset at the beheadings our "allies" in Saudi Arabia have executed this week. Are we going to attack Saudi Arabia? Or are we going to kiss their hand and capitulate? We claim the moral high ground, yet we are hypocrites. We claim the moral high ground yet our nation is being destroyed by greed. We claim the moral high ground as we are dropping bombs on wedding parties.

America has become a hammer, and to a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

[Dems to Win]

80. Call up the Saudi king, tell him he has a problem he needs to take care of

Remind the king of all those American weapons that equip the Saudi military. Tell the king in no uncertain terms that America will do absolutely nothing if the Saudi-created Frankenstein creature attacks Saudi Arabia. So they had better take ISIS out before they get to the Saudi border.

Hold a press conference outlining all the military equipment sold by the US to Saudi Arabia, point out how they have the capacity to solve the problem they created, and we expect them to do so. Announce that this is a great opportunity for the real Muslims of Saudi Arabia to show the world their compassion and concern for all humans by taking out ISIS before they kill anyone else, Muslim or non-Muslim.

In short, I'd like to see Obama use the bully pulpit of the presidency to shame the Saudis into doing the right thing for once.

[sub.theory]

90. Not a bad idea

Saudi Arabia is more to blame than anyone for ISIS. I don't think they are going to proactively attack ISIS without US involvement, however. Even though they are at risk themselves. I think they are paralyzed too by the monster they played such a role in creating. They apparently told Kerry they will be involved, however, and I hope Kerry made clear we expect boots on the ground from them.

[amandabeech]

111. There have been numerous reports over the years stating that the Saudi Army

is virtually worthless and they are all or mostly Sunnis. ISIS is Sunni. I wouldn't expect that an ordinarily useless army would fight their own brothers. Not going to happen. They'd be more likely to turn and fight the Iraqi Army which is composed of Shia Iraqis led by Shia Iranians.

The Saudi Air Force is supposed to be much better, and they might be able to do something if helped by the US.

Every time we get involved in this part of the world, we mess up because we just do not understand the culture, and even when we get a clue, we do what we want.

[Dems to Win]

125. Thank you

In this environment, "Not a bad idea" sounds like a high compliment.

[BlueStreak]

91. We have the wrong "friends" there. Until that is up for consideratoin, nothing else matters

Our biggest "friends" in the region are Israel and Saudi Arabia.

At every turn, Israel stocks to fight with the Arabs and drags us into the middle of it.

And Saudi was the country behind 911 (16 of the 19 attackers were Saudis as was Osama bin Laden.) Saud put out the funding that put ISIS in business

We need to understand that the Sunnis are mostly Medieval. The more progressive Muslims are the Shia, so if we have a natural partner in the region (and in the Islamic world) it should be Iran.

Obama isn't in a position to stand up to the Saudis or the Israelis, so what we get is what we saw last night. More permawar. And that's jusst the way the Israelis and the military industry like it.

[RoccoR5955]

96. I would do the following

Pull ALL military assets out of the Middle East. Close and unstaff ALL embassies, all military bases in the area.
I would request that all parties that have purchased weaponry from us give or sell it back to us.

Pull all personnel, all civillians and military out of the entire Middle East.

I would propose that only the parties at conflict fight one another, without intervention form anyone.

Then let the countries decide for themselves, fight each other if they have to, and let THEM figure out who has won.

We need to keep our noses out of other people's countries. We are NOT the world's police force.

I would also implement a Manhattan Project style of program to get the US totally off of fossil fuel, and give it to any country that wanted it for free.

Then there could be some sort of start to peace, but violence only begets more violence. Violence is not the way to solve this.

[handmade34]

101. if it hasn't already been suggested...

it would be a good idea to send all the war hawks over there to fight them directly

[ann---]

104. Covert operations

No bombs, no boots, no money.

[GeorgeGist]

107. Same as Jemaah Islamiya.

[jamzrockz]

121. I would first

end all sanctions on Syria. Then impose the harshest economic sanctions on countries aiding ISIS. Another set of sanctions on countries that buy stolen oil from ISIS. Also, I would assist the Syrian govt with intelligence and hardware to fight ISIS

Finally, I will cut all aid to the so called moderate rebels. The civil war and the disorder that is causes is the perfect atmosphere for the ISIS to grow. I will stop adding fuel to the fire and allow the war to end.

That is how you kill ISIS without doing much.

[jmowreader]

122. Use the twenty intelligence agencies at my disposal

SOMEONE is funding ISIL/ISIS/IS/al-Qaeda in Iraq/whatever you wish to call them. We are funding a large number of three-letter agencies - CIA, NSA, DIA, NRO, you name it, those agencies are filled with very smart people who can shut down the cash flow to the terrorists; no money leads to no war.

[markpkessinger]

123. I've been thinking a bit about this question . . .

First, it strikes me that there are countries in the region with a far bigger stake in all of this, and which have the resources to confront the threat posed by ISIL (if they chose to do so), most prominent among them being Saudi Arabia and Iran. The U.S. by intervening directly, gives room to both of those countries to continue playing out their centuries-old sectarian struggle for geopolitical control of the region. It seems to me we have considerable leverage with both countries, if only our leaders had the cojones to use it. Imagine this: the Secretary of State says to the government of both countries, "Look, we are not going to solve this problem. You need to find a way to work together to meet a common threat." The Secretary offers to provide financial support and materiel as needed, but ONLY to a joint undertaking, not to either country individually. Then, to Saudi Arabia, the Secretary says: "Either agree to work with Iran in eradicating ISIL, or ALL U.S. military aid to Saudi Arabia stops TODAY." And to Iran, the Secretary says: "You want (and need) to have sanctions eased. Here's how you do it: work with Saudi Arabia to eradicate ISIL. Doing so will demonstrate to the U.S. and its allies that Iran wishes to be a responsible player on the world stage, and therefore deserves to have an easing of the sanctions against it."

But of course, the oil behemoths would never go for standing up to Saudi Arabia like that, so it's all a pipedream.

[fadedrose]

126. Haven't a clue, but am happy about Congress

getting into this full-steam. Listened to a hearing yesterday -financial - and they are very courteous with one another. They will debate today for 6 hours from what I understood.

The good thing is that none of them knows what to do, so ideas from dems and reps will be listened to and maybe some wisdom will enter the discussions....Some things that will be touched upon are funding, air strikes, boots on the ground, etc.

Let's hope they stick to the truth, common sense, and stop playing politics. If they do, we can beat (or manage) ISIS.

Life is forcing our politicians to work together - finally.