Most Americans Say Send Ground Troops to Fight ISIS

[panju1]

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.

[bryant.coleman]

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.

[galdur]

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.

[panju1]

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.

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.

[galdur]

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.

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.  

[Aggressor66]

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.

[Snail2]

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.

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

[galdur]

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/

[galdur]

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.

[Beliathon]

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

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

[BADecker]

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.

[galdur]

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.

[BigBoy89]

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.

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. 

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

[zenitzz]

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.

[panju1]

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.

[BADecker]

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.

[troleybüs]

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.

[galdur]

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.

[bryant.coleman]

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.

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.

[hunnaryb]

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