The US Military only has a 7% chance of defeating ISIS!

The USA, even Republicans, are terrified of having soldiers on the ground and pretend you can win solely by bombing. ISIS uses this fact in their recruitment videos. The USA and West have lost their moxy and are afraid of a fight.

 

We need to be aware that we have been bombing for a long time now. And, we need to remember the lessons of Iraq, where our full military on the ground did not make significant progress against AQI until the locals were willing to bet on us having a solution for the problems they faced.

We do not have that critical element today. In fact, we screwed the Sunnis big time that last time.

So, what is our pitch to Sunnis THIS time?

 

All it took to change German and Japan was totally destroying their industry and infrastructure with a million bombs and a billion bullets and artillery, obliterating most of their cities, killing 25% of the male population, killing a couple million of their civilians, forcing them in to starvation, imprisoning hundreds of thousands of others at least temporarily, outlawing their philosophies, eliminating their militaries, and occupying them with tens of thousands of troops.

A piece of cake. I say we just get to it. We could start by carpet and fire bombing Mosul and Ramadi. Faluja too. A 2 front invasion out of Turkey and Saudi Arabia to meet in the center, killing or capturing every male of fighting age along the way. A fair amount of rape along the way highlights the message. Or we could do it the classical way - kill everyone in a few cities to get our point across. This is how societies have historically been changed in cultural ideology. Two generations of survivors later the original ideology is forgotten and the imposed one accepted.

That's how the Greeks, Persians, Romans, Christians and Muslims did it. Pretty much that way across all of history. Kill everyone who expresses disagreement and non-submission as brutally as possible.

 

I do not at all disagree with you on those points (although the actual degree of bombing is unknown). I'm not a fan of going into Syria particularly under obama and the "progressives". I just disagree that the RAND report means we cannot defeat ISIS, or that no strategy will defeat them.

 

It took more boots on the ground to occupy Germany after they surrendered than it took to defeat the German military on the battlefield.

 

The IRA is not an interest of mine. Debate its merits with someone more directly concerned. My point was that the IRA was never difficult for the Ulster Scotts to deal with until the UK sent in it's Army to save them.

The Barbary pirates were Islamists. They operated rather like the IS.

 

The Rand report sounds exactly like what others have said, including the Pentagon.

That doesn't mean failure, but it does say what is required.

Assad has disenfranchised 75% of his nation (the Sunnis tthere), and continues to bomb them. ISIL will not be reduced to acceptable levels while that is the case. And, switching to have us and Russia bomb the Sunnis is not a solution.

 

It was the RAND Corp. that convinced JFK and LBJ that an unconventional war could be won in South Vietnam.

You see how the U.S. military has been obsessed with acronyms and it was the Rand Corp. that coined (no pun intended) the acronym "COIN" ( counterinsurgency )

But by the mid/late 1960's the Rand Corp. discovered they got it wrong when it came to South East Asia. That President Esienhower had it right all along.

This is when you saw so many hawks with in the Rand Corp. who became liberal doves and some actually became leaders of the anti war movement like Daniel Ellsberg.

 

ISIL does not behave like pirates.

It is a bad idea to ignore other cases of terrorism in modern times.

And, that goes double for terrorism in Iraq, as we opposed that in various ways and had various degrees of success and failure.

 

ISIS is not a repeat of WW2. They want Armageddon, not surrender.

There is no "victory" in Armageddon, everyone loses.

- - - Updated - - -

Please provide credible evidence to substantiate that claim.

- - - Updated - - -

ISIS is not interested in fighting a conventional war.

 

The ANC was at least the same size as ISIS as are the Palestinians and the Taliban.

Size is irrelevant to those findings. What matters is the ideology driving the terrorists. If they are willing to die for it then the military stands no chance of prevailing because it is impossible to kill an idea.

 

It would be a mistake to fight ISIS on it's own terms and the battlefield of it's own choice.

That is basic military 101 tactics.

Taking on ISIS on the ground would be a huge mistake and play directly into their agenda.

 

That is the most un-American thing I have ever seen posted. We the People should never stoop to the level of the barbarians.

 

It walk a few time, and then? If one population is brutalised by an other, they may obey to it as long as their agressors are more powerful than they are and that they can't deffend themselves - then, if they are able to take revenge, they will did it, and you will have full of death people in both side... No one well-balanced people wich that... The people don't forget, that's a mistake to think that: there's hate between countries, ethnies, wich are here since centuries and centuries all above the world...

The better to do with this part of the world would be to cut all the links who have with them. Like that, no problem anymore. But people will say that this isn't right... They don't see what's happen when we made the Western and the Orient in contact: often a disaster, for both camps.

 

There was very little resistance after the German surrender. It was not tolerated. The USSR kept E. Germany - hence the large troop presence.

 

A principal part of Jihad is enslavement, The IS, like the Barbary pirates conducted mass enslavement campaigns.

IMO, the US should not send troops to war in the ME or anywhere else under current leadership and rules of engagement. Do you disagree?

 

Only if you follow so called rules of war, if you take gloves off a terrorist or insurgent group can easily be defeated.

 

So lowering ourselves to the same barbaric level as ISIS is the "solution"?

 

Oh the usual PC we are enlightened people bull(*)(*)(*)(*). War is war, you can only fight it as a barbarian, winning is the only rule that one has to follow.

 

Lowering ourselves to the same barbarous level as ISIS means that they have won because we are now no better than they are.

 

In fact, IS has been fighting conventional battles with conventional arms (American conventional arms) to win battles and take and control territory.

 

A conventional battle with ISIS to retake that territory won't defeat them.

 

Same way Hitler won, because we lowered ourselves and took Dresden off the map along with couple hundred thousand German civilians. Get a better logic.

 

So, is it your position that the "Greeks, Persians, Romans, Christians and Muslims" are "barbarians"?

 

Are you suggesting that I have called for sending troops into the ME to fight the IS? Read my posts more carefully?