Sunday, September 28, 2014

Opinion: Is the United States following the best policy possible to combat ISIL and other terrorist groups?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/09/28/airstrikes-syria-strategy/16286679/ 

5 comments:

Gabby T said...

Personally I think that we should do whatever is best for the United States. I think our number one prioritiy should always be to keep all of the citizens safe. However, I think it is a shame that we have to spend $22 Billion over the course of one year on combat with terrorists groups. That money could be spent on a lot of different things that could be very beneficial to our country.

Tim Gomon said...

I do not believe the US is following the best policy possible. I think that the US should immediately send troops to the middle east to crush terrorist groups before they gain enough power to potentially take control of weaker nation. If the US is to intervene and wipe out ISIS then the threat of a militant nation with terrorist intentions is avoided and the US would then be safe

Austin K. said...

It is my opinion that the US should continue to utilize primarily airborne military engagement in fighting ISIL and terrorists in the Middle East. Cost effectiveness should be a considerable variable when discussing military operations in general, but especially so when discussing a conflict that has such an unknown future and outcome. I feel that it is dangerous for the US to commit an estimated $22 billion dollars a year as well as thousands of lives when it cannot yet be determined the extent of US future involvement and/or how many years the troops would have to remain in deployment. In 2001, the plan was to be in and out of the Middle East in months, at the most a few years. That is not me attacking the conflict or the purpose or the troops, but it is my primary reservation when the US discusses commitment of troops or a long term engagement. Few countries plan to remain in conflict for an extended period, but when analyzing a military commitment, it is my opinion the worst must be assumed, and after that the best hoped.

Andrew Boster said...

In my opinion the US should primarily use airborne military engagement in fighting ISIL. I do not like the idea of 22 billion dollars a year. Especially because we do not know the US future involvement in this situation, but I think that if we have the chance to try and take out ISIS at the threat of terrorism is definitely decreased

Jessie K. said...

I think that we will never know it is best for policy for the United States. If we are always using the same policy then we will never know if something else might be better. I think it is smart to keep troupes out of it. At some points I almost feel like if they are not threatening us we should stay out of it,but ISIL has threatened us so We feel like we need to fight back.