Jordan sent out fighter jets, targeting ISIS' weapons and ammunitions supplies.
Meanwhile, UAE is withdrawing their troops in fear of losing their pilots. Sigh.
I think it's time for the Allied Forces to bring the troops back on the ground.
To finish this fight once and for all.
We all know that airstrikes are not enough to stop ISIS from coming back.
Even if ISIS were completely eliminated, the possibility of a new terrorist organization springing forth is very likely to happen.
We must kill all of these extremists at all costs, with whatever means necessary.
Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
Jordan sent out fighter jets, targeting ISIS' weapons and ammunitions supplies.Meanwhile, UAE is withdrawing their troops in fear of losing their pilots. Sigh.
I think it's time for the Allied Forces to bring the troops back on the ground.
To finish this fight once and for all.We all know that airstrikes are not enough to stop ISIS from coming back.
Even if ISIS were completely eliminated, the possibility of a new terrorist organization springing forth is very likely to happen.
We must kill all of these extremists at all costs, with whatever means necessary.
Aren't you one of the ones who were saying just a page or two back that "sending more troops back in would be futile"?
Originally posted by Star428
Aren't you one of the ones who were saying just a page or two back that "sending more troops back in would be futile"?
Now I think it's better to send in the troops and finish off this organization for good, until the time another organization forms again.
Then we send another wave of troops.
Whatever it takes to keep the peace, and stop terrorism from spreading throughout other parts of the world.
I agree but you know that we don't have infinite resources. It costs lots of money to go to war and considering how Obama has cut back our military, going to full scale war with ISIS could seriously weaken our defenses here at home since it could take a while to wipe out an organization that is scattered around and will never be brave enough to engage us in open warfare.
Originally posted by Star428
going to full scale war with ISIS could seriously weaken our defenses here at home
The US military isn't really responsible for defending the United States from terrorist attacks. That's the responsibility of Homeland Security, federal and local police, the coast guard (which isn't going to be involved in any foreign engagement), the FBI, and the NSA. We could send a quarter million troops to Iraq and Syria and our capacity to defend against terrorism at home wouldn't change much.
If anything, "full-scale war" would make our defenses more alert.
Yeah, of course it would make our defenses more alert. That's common sense that when you're at war your military and national defenses are on highest alert. I wasn't questioning that and I'm also well aware that the military isn't fully responsible for defending the country against terrorist attacks. But,it's not terrorists attacking the country that I was worried about but other nations and Homeland Security and Coast Guard isn't really equipped for that. That's when our military is needed.
I mean, what better time to attack the US than when a large portion of it's military is far away? Yeah, I know it's extremely unlikely for many reasons like the fact that any nation strong enough to seriously threaten us has to come across one of the two huge oceans which will give us ample warning time to prepare except for Russia attacking Alaska, of course , since they're so close to it. We also have plenty of nukes too which will make any country think twice before attacking us even when we're at our weakest but still... I don't know. I just feel safer when a huge part of our military is not so far away.
If it wasn't for the military cutbacks Obama made then it probably wouldn't bother me so much but you're probably right anyway.
Originally posted by Star428
Yeah, of course it would make our defenses more alert. That's common sense that when you're at war your military and national defenses are on highest alert. I wasn't questioning that and I'm also well aware that the military isn't fully responsible for defending the country against terrorist attacks. But,it's not terrorists attacking the country that I was worried about but other nations and Homeland Security and Coast Guard isn't really equipped for that. That's when our military is needed.I mean, what better time to attack the US than when a large portion of it's military is far away? Yeah, I know it's extremely unlikely for many reasons like the fact that any nation strong enough to seriously threaten us has to come across one of the two huge oceans which will give us ample warning time to prepare except for Russia attacking Alaska, of course , since they're so close to it. We also have plenty of nukes too which will make any country think twice before attacking us even when we're at our weakest but still... I don't know. I just feel safer when a huge part of our military is not so far away.
If it wasn't for the military cutbacks Obama made then it probably wouldn't bother me so much but you're probably right anyway.
Russia simply doesn't have the ability to bring an army across the Bering Strait to invade Alaska. It doesn't have the ships, it doesn't have the air power. At the moment, the Russian Far East is probably the most poorly defended region on earth (after Greenland) if you're talking military personnel per square mile. Russian commanders there have repeatedly expressed concerns that if China wanted to encroach on Russia's Far Eastern territories nothing short of nuclear weapons would stop them. Russia is in no position to attack America with conventional forces, and if you're talking nuclear war then the subject of American troop deployments is all but irrelevant.
Anonymous hacked into various ISIS recruiting accounts. 😂