The debate "The United States should engage into a full war against ISIS." was started by
October 7, 2015, 4:20 pm.
21 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 20 people are on the disagree side.
That might be enough to see the common perception.
It looks like most of the people in this community are on the agreeing side of this statement.
opinionsvsfacts posted 1 argument, Alex posted 4 arguments, Hitmenjr posted 8 arguments to the agreers part.
PsychDave posted 4 arguments, historybuff posted 15 arguments, Hitmenjr posted 1 argument, omactivate posted 1 argument to the disagreers part.
opinionsvsfacts, stevenchen, leprechaundances, Alex, Hitmenjr, otakunime00, Ryan, AstroSpace, char and 12 visitors agree.
PsychDave, historybuff, Triz, ailasorecarg, FEBUARY14, fuckthehatersss, pajrc1234, HowdyDoody03, Sosocratese, omactivate and 10 visitors disagree.
we can't do this. This will take a lot of American lives and money. We can't just run in and fight. This is a world problem not just an American problem. War is always a last resort for if we are threatened by our enemy
I hope they are stopped. but if Westerners get more involved it will only make the situation worse.
We will be watching the middle east with anxious eyes and hope for the best.
I understand where you are coming from but if any western power went in to try to settle things it would generate more anger. We would be seen as invaders cone to kill their children, brothers and husbands, and that fear and anger at us would create another generation of people who blame the west for the terrible conditions. By supplying aid and assistance to local forces trying to put down the terrorists and extremists we help prevent their spread while avoiding the trap of looking like we are the bad guys come to oppress the locals.
That region has been chaos for a while now...ever since the golf war...but I understand your point...let the flames die out and let them face the consequences. I am just worried that this will blow way out of proportion and we will be forced to go to war...The small flames might burn themselves out or it will catch somthing else on fire...I just feel like we should stomp out the flames and get it over with and gain some respect from the UN or at least Israel.
Which countries are chaos specifically? and Iran had never threatened with nuclear weapons. they don't have any.
The neighboring countries are chaos. Iran has threated with nuclear weapons. Do u know anything about the middle east. Stable is not how I would describe the middle east goverments
That whole thing was nonsense. ISIS is hated by every government in the region. they have no hope of spreading outside of Iraq/Syria. the only reason they can hold there is because there was chaos. the neighboring countries are much more stable and able to defend themselves. Russia is not going to attack. They are outgunned like 10 to 1. it isn't a threat to the west.
Historybuff let's do nothing, let ISIS grow, have iran bomb Isreal, and then us. Wait till its too late, and we are dead. Also defeating ISIS, and other middle east groups will scare russia so they don't bomb us. Same with China.
No. there was no way to win without literally killing everyone in Vietnam. because 85 -90% of the population wanted you gone. you could kill alot of people. you could never hold it without leaving half a million men there forever and losing 10,000 of them every year.
Sorry thought that was Alex's reply.
Might isn't right. you could fight half the world if you wanted to. you'd lose millions of people and not accomplish anything positive, but you could. but no one wants that either.
Im not saying we should've...im saying we have the military might to.
Why? what gives you the right to invade those countries? other than pissing off most of the world, what would it accomplish?
Do a full all power war in the middle east exept for isreal. There may be another good country not to bomb.
how exactly could they have won?
But it was of not of the best interests of the US.
Oh we could of won it if we wanted to...
And no amount of military force could have won that war. it was doomed from the beginning.
Neither Israel or Afghanistan want American ground troops. they want support but they do not want an American occupation force.
Israel and the Afghan Government have both asked for support...are those not legitimate governments? And Obama pulled the troops out of the middle east...If we didn't half assed our effort...we could of had the situation under control.
American and Vietnamese troops crossed into Cambodia and Laos on many occasions. not to mention the unrestricted bombing of those same countries. the Americans had no chance of winning whatever they did short of nuclear weapons. fighting ISIS is a similar problem. the more you fight them the more support they gain. in short the more you intervene the worse you make the situation.
The Vietnamese didn't hit and run into other countries, they hid in the jungle. This could be compared to how the Afghani groups hide in the hills in caves and perform hit and run attacks. How do you propose to overcome this to untie your hands?
Also, I didn't ask the question. You may want to review the arguments before responding.
To awnser your question dave...We had both our hands tied behind our backs because we could not follow the communist Vietnamese army into other countrys they hid in...Instead we had to stay in Vietnam because we were part of the UN and they were not...so they didn't have the same rules as we. They got to flank us from other countrys...so it was a game of hit and run. They also made inhumane traps...and we could do nothing...
You really don't understand how ISIS came to power, do you? They gained support because there was a power vacuum caused by the US, and because those in the region hate the West because they have repeatedly been bombed, invaded and otherwise abused by us. Your proposed solution is to invade them and force them to submit so that they stop hating you, and you honestly don't seem to see the problem with that logic.
in the world wars they were asked for help by a legitimate government. in Korea their legitimacy was questionable but at least they were wanted. No one wants Americas on the ground against ISIS. literally no one. not the iraqi government, not the Syrians, no one. it isn't even an option.
So we shouldn't of entered either of the world wars? Those were foreign...Korea and the Golf war mean nothing to you either?
And how exactly were their hands tied in Vietnam? they had free reign to bomb and kill as much as they wanted. the only thing they weren't allowed to do was use nuclear weapons.
This time we will hopfuly not have both our hand tied behind our backs...
there are very few reasons that I would accept for putting American soldiers on the ground. history has proven that dropping Westerners into other people's countries only makes things worse. Just look at Vietnam. No amount of American troops could make that war winnable. Over 500,000 American troops were deployed at one time. And they still got their asses handed to them. what makes you think that you can win a ground war against Isis? The more Americans you put there the more they hate you. The more recruits they get. it needs to be troops from the region. you can't fight the Middle Eastern wars for them.
wait till 2017 and then go war on if necessary.
so, your basically saying that ISIS can still behead, our people? they burned a Jordanian Pilot alive in a cage? there is active investigations and arrest in all 50 states.
Are you insane? did you learn nothing from Iraq? or Vietnam?
A US invasion, even with the best intentions, would create more support for ISIS fighting against the US invaders.