Bitcoin Forum

Most Americans Say Send Ground Troops to Fight ISIS

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/06/politics/isis-obama-poll/

For the first time in CNN/ORC polling, a majority of Americans (53%) say the U.S. should send ground troops to Iraq or Syria to fight ISIS. At the same time, 6-in-10 disapprove of the President's handling of terrorism and 68% say America's military response to the terrorist group thus far has not been aggressive enough.

Overall, 60% say the U.S. military action against ISIS forces in Iraq and Syria is going badly, that's actually an improvement since October, when 67% said things were going poorly.

This should have been done in 2012, and not now. Back then, ISIS could have been wiped out in a matter of days with a dedicated ground force. That said, I would support the American ground troops if they are sent to destroy the ISIS in Syria. But if their real intention is to topple Assad and to fight against the Kurds, then I am afraid that it is not going to end very well for them.

Not to mention that the Iraqis aren´t very excited about getting U.S. troops back in their land, which is understandable. There are many unsettled scores, I´m sure, and Iraq is chaotic and unstable off the charts as it is. I seriously doubt that the U.S. military en masse would be a healthy ingredient in that soup. Of course as usual they wouldn´t ask for permission (or maybe ask for permission for appearances sake and ignore the refusal)  which would make it even worse.

I don´t know; maybe most of those people that want to send troops to fight the terrorists, think it´s just a question of landing soldiers that then march off to wipe out the enemy. After all, most of their wisdom is from garbage media and serial-lying politicians. I sure that the last thing they´d consider is whether anybody over there is interested in being invaded and any risk of adverse consequences no the possibility of that is always zero especially since it´s never taken into account beforehand at all. In fact there is never any rational plan at all which of course makes everything easy because it doesn´t even need to be discussed.

If they do send in ground troops, the ground troops should stay until there is a semblance of normalcy in the country. If they make an unduly hasty exit, then ISIS and other such players will again emerge in the power vaccuum.

Yeah, normalcy. The ever elusive normalcy. After destroying country after country and in effect creating the perfect breeding ground for terrorism, those with a perfect record of rushing off to war without any planning are now going to bring normalcy. I kind of tend to don´t think so.  ;D

I really don't believe the poll. Many Americans are sick of the war and want the Middle East to start cleaning up their mess. We've had enough of heroes coming home in body bags, injured, PTSD, etc.......... Iraq and Afghanistan had numerous years to get their shit together and they can't due to religious and political reasons among themselves, which produced more terrorist groups. The Shiites and Sunni have been fighting each other for centuries and no country on earth is going to stop it.

I'm just wondering how much the military-industrial complex paid for this poll :).

Pentagon Hypes ‘Surging Sales’ for US Missile Makers
US 'Running Out of Missiles' Because They're Attacking So Many Targets

by Jason Ditz, December 06, 2015

The massive US military industrial complex is struggling to keep up, according to officials, with ever-escalating attacks on various targets across the planet, and growing demands from its various customers looking to build up their assorted missile arsenals for assorted wars.

Pentagon officials are hyping “surging sales” while warning that they are lobbing missiles and bombs at stuff faster than they can replace them, and that ultimately the US is facing a supply shortage. Their solution, unsurprisingly, is massive new funding for weapons production.

3,271 munitions were dropped in November, and officials say some 32,000 have been fired overall in the 16-months of the ISIS war. Given that the US is talking up a protracted war lasting “a generation or more,” this is expected to be a drop in the bucket of what they plan to eventually use.

While the Pentagon is presenting this as a pseudo-crisis, the companies are all salivating at the huge profits to come from a protracted and ever-growing war against ISIS. The Pentagon’s crisis mode, as ever, is expected to begin and end with another trip to Congress to lobby for a hike in military spending.

http://news.antiwar.com/2015/12/06/pentagon-hypes-surging-sales-for-us-missile-makers/

Yeah, I think this about nails it.

The massive US military industrial complex is struggling to keep up, according to officials, with ever-escalating attacks on various targets across the planet, and growing demands from its various customers looking to build up their assorted missile arsenals for assorted wars.

Fuck that, no more westerners should die for these ignorant barbarians.

Nuke the Middle East, start with the House of Saud.

Nuking them would spread radioactivity around all of Europe.

Send in the CIA to cause internal conflicts, so that they all destroy themselves.

:)

Stop supporting psychopaths. If you do, you´re no better than them. You have no concern for public safety. And if you hope that they will somehow at some point stop being psychopaths of their own accord; forget it. Won´t happen. The only way to stop them is to take them out of circulation.

https://scontent-ams3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xtp1/v/t1.0-9/12301770_10101508759940150_8655308501994751314_n.jpg?oh=f1bc76cf2a6f0b38d91c6960171a03a0&oe=571E7E23

Yeah invading countries is the root cause of terrorism and when USA goes to war with an country it destroys the country and leaves people with nothing and all they have in mind is revenge like they have nothing to lose so they don't care about their life and choose the wrong way and kills innocents in return so it would be good for Americans not to go for war with any country and try spending that budget on poor Americans and old age homes and for any noble cause

I don't think they have their facts straight. My perspective is that the vast majority of Americans DO NOT want to send our troops there to fight. At least not until there is a strong commitment from the local countries to fight them first.

The article is from CNN, so I think they must have got their survey methodology right.
Possibly, Americans believe that the war will get over quickly if there are troops on the ground.

Polling is deceptive. The way the questions are asked, and the order in which they are asked, can elicit the answers that the people doing the polling desire, rather than what the people polled really think.

:)

They are right. If American Army destroy ISIS with their ground troops then don't wait, send them tomorrow! There are 2 possibilites.
1-They destroy ISIS. Win for whole world
2-They lose the war as they did in Vietnam and Afghanistan, but both side lose a lot of power. Other forces destroy ISIS. Win for whole world.
Either way, it's a win-win for us.

It isn´t just ISIS. Remember al-Queda? The terrorists that we created for our purposes but then supposedly lost control of? Well, their freakin franchise is part of the "moderate opposition" in Syria and is of course active in Iraq as well, where they came from. They´re just as dangerous, forward looking, as ISIS, it´s just that they´re much less vocal about their plans. Much more subtle and insidious than ISIS and much more difficult to defeat not least since as before western nutbags use them for allies when it suits their purposes.

I am assuming that the mood changed after the San Bernadino terrorist attacks. Earlier the Americans were thinking that if they don't send in their ground troops, then the ISIS might refrain from attacking targets inside the United States. But with the latest terror attack in which more than a dozen civilians were killed, that assumption proved to be false.

They say send troops, but then when body bags return home, the public opinion changes very quickly.

Fuck ground troops, send killer robots with lasers and tactical nukes and shit.

If the west is to be the Great Satan for these barbarians, we ought to do our best to play the part.

They and the garbage media will make sure that it´s as little visible as possible. That drill is known from Iraq and Afghanistan. And like in Afghanistan and even more in Iraq back then, they´ll define the number of dead and maimed troops as low as they possibly can. If they die from their wounds at Manstein in Germany they´re not really casualties of combat in Iraq et cetera. You know how they bend the statistics so it fits their agenda. These are fucking lunatics, always bear that in mind.

They learned their lesson in Vietnam. Back then there was still some decency and morality and the real horrors of war up close and personal were shown in spades on TV. But that was terrible publicity for war and its popularity tanked and since then it´s just embedded whores that show and say what they´re told.

Em-bed. You can see how cocky these people are, They even mock their whores that they use, and also the public that consume the drivel.

Body bags have been returning to the United States ever since 2001. But the public opinion hasn't changed considerably. The urban elite doesn't care about the body bags. Nor does the religious nuts and the welfare rats. Only the hard working lower middle class people are returning in body bags, and they don't receive much of media attention.

Yeah?  I got news for you, newbie that stepped into Beliathon's puppet.

ISIS is an Internet war.

I support this now because it will cost less now in both finances and men lost to battle. Islam State continue to grow in size and brutality. Barbaric slaughter will continue until they are completely eradicated

Also, ground offensives are less prone to collateral casualties. Deaths and injuries among the civilians will be reduced. With the American air strikes frequently bombing hospitals and schools, there is an urgent requirement to reduce the civilian casualties. BTW... I am not sure whether a ground offensive will be less costly when compared to an air offensive.  >:(

Is this true?
Americans never committed this mistake again, (they done in Afghanistan and Iraq earlier). Americans will never send their troops without the help of other nations, and this problem will never resolved without the will of Syria, and Russia is on the back of Syria, so in these situation how can Americans even think about to send their troops with the fight against ISIS.
The migrants are another problem, every 5th in them is associated with militant groups or ISIS, so the threat is not only for Syria but also for the peace of world specially those countries who allowed the migrants in their countries.
All those countries allowed then on the name of mankind and on the sake of humanity, i think they should scooternized the migrant’s papers and allow them in their after full checking.

There is no way to scrutinize their papers and passports. The Syrian population registry is no longer functioning and many of the passport offices in the opposition held ares are dishing out passports with fake data at a rate of hundreds per day. Most of the Pakistani and Afghan immigrants are buying these passports for less than $1,000 apiece, and there is no way to prevent this practice.

All American troops are volunteers. If the recruiters do their job right, there will be no end to the troops that can be sent anywhere.

Before the troops enlist, they are only kids, who don't know what they are getting themselves into. Fighting around the world will teach them.

:)

Thank Goodness that the military and the medical don't know anything about nutrition. If they did, they would feed the old, retired, soldiers vitamins and nutrients, converting them into strong, youthful fighters again. Then they would re-activate them, and sent them all over the world as well.

:)

That is what the armed forces around the world claim. But the truth is that many of these recruits are lower middle class youth with low education, who have no other option to earn a decent livelihood. Most of them hail from the rural regions of the United States. None of the urban elite will send their children to the military.

I feel both parties have good points (not ISIS of course!). On one hand this type of terrorism should be fought at all levels and is not some BS like weapons of mass destruction excuse or scapegoats like that. We've seen their "power" firsthand. On the other hand, US and other countries should stop messing with other countries affairs if they want to avoid raising terrorists and fanatics.

There's also a third point, the ones who think doing nothing is a solution but then ask for support for Dafur or whatever country is in trouble. Ideally we send The Avengers and they don't kill any babies or have any collateral damage but we know that's not possible so hands inevitable get dirty.

Doesn't matter.  Presentation of a false passport is criminal, and certainly grounds to deny entry.  Presentation of no passport or little or no verifiable data is grounds to deny entry.

And that's the way it should be.

My opinion is that the USA is on the wrong side, and should be fighting with Russia against ISIS.

That is the way it should have been. But right now, no one is following those rules. Angela Merkel want to import as many immigrants as possible, so that she could remain in power for at least 10 more years. It doesn't matter whether these immigrants are having a fake passport or no passport. No one is going to deport them.

Yes, they should be fighting along with Russia against a common enemy.
unfortunately, they are thinking long term... about life after ISIS.