72% Believe U.S. Will Use American Combat Troops Against ISIS

[IDemo]

Source: NBC

More than seven in 10 Americans say the United States will end up using its own combat troops against ISIS militants in Iraq and Syria, despite President Barack Obama’s assertion that U.S. combat troops won’t be on the ground there.

This finding comes from a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal/Annenberg poll, which also shows that Americans are divided over the merits of using U.S. combat troops – 45 percent are in favor of using them if military commanders think they’re the best way to defeat the ISIS army, while 37 percent are opposed.

President Obama has repeatedly stressed that America will not fight “another ground war in Iraq.” Instead, ground troops combating ISIS will be Iraqis and Syrian rebels, with assistance from U.S.- and coalition-led airstrikes.

“As your commander-in-chief, I will not commit you and the rest of our Armed Forces to fighting another ground war in Iraq,” he told U.S. military personnel earlier this month. “After a decade of massive ground deployments, it is more effective to use our unique capabilities in support of partners on the ground so they can secure their own countries’ futures. And that's the only solution that will succeed over the long term.”

Read more: http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/isis-terror/poll-72-believe-u-s-will-use-american-combat-troops-n212791

[libdem4life]

1. Now what might encourage them to think that? Hmm. n/t

[Fred Sanders]

18. Unable to gin up enough fear to start an actual war, the mass media resorts to their own custom

push polls.....we have seen this movie before.

Meanwhile Syria recaptures a long held rebel suburban stronghold in Damascus as the rebels/terrorists
are pummelled by America.

Assad should be sending flowers to the WH.

[libdem4life]

36. Yes, we're caught up in the enemy of my enemy is a friend except those who are still

enemies of my friends who may become enemies and then have to find some other friends. That's about our knowledge of the ME. A revolving door to the American consciousness.

[RoccoR5955]

2. I wonder how many would go over and fight them themselves

or send their children there.
Then ask the same question that if they reinstated a draft, would they be willing to send their kids, and any adult under 35 to go fight.
Let's see what the results are then.

[Man from Pickens]

10. I would not send a stranger into that fight

I see no valid strategic or military objective that could be achieved by war and the horrific consequences of war. And I think we have solid evidence to show that when you send people into a war zone to kill other people on dubious pretenses, a lot of them come back being not-OK with that.

[totodeinhere]

23. That's a different issue. It is quite possible to be skeptical about Obama's promise not

to send boots on the ground while at the same time opposing sending boots on the ground. Just because I don't believe Obama that doesn't mean that I should go over there and fight.

[valerief]

25. Expecting the worst (OP) and wanting the worst (your post) are two different things. nt

[HereSince1628]

3. We don't need to imagine this... attack pilots are combatants

The first one brought down by anti-aircraft fire will make that very clear.

Playing with words to paste over our concern is psy-ops, yes?

[Crowman1979]

4. Of course who the hell under the age of 40 watches NBC news?

[ballyhoo]

6. Or even over these days...not I....

[Enrique]

13. the poll results have nothing to do with watching NBC news

i'm not sure if that's what you were getting at.

[Sunlei]

5. those war profiteers who make huge profits off ground troop support, need to BUG OFF to ME countries

Go make 'sales calls' to Turkey and Kurdish fighters and the Iraq gov.,

See if those countries will pay you billions of their 'Federal funds' to air condition tents,provide meals, internet connections, entertainment. gasoline stations and move supplies.

Quit Lobbying your Congress buddies for another trillion in Americans Federal funds. You're wealthy enough from the trillions you already took.

[joshdawg]

7. Cynicism and sarcasm aside,

I am not one to support sending ground troops into Iraq again. As a matter of fact, we need to get ALL our troops out of the Middle East, Period, Exclamation Point! ASAP! Yesterday!

[OnyxCollie]

8. Mission accomplished. nt

[ballyhoo]

9. Basically, it means no one believes this

man about this or really much of anything anymore.

[fbc]

11. How many believe we will use troops against Shamistan?

Most Americans can't pick out Europe on a map, but if you ask them if we will use troops against X they are smart enough to know the answer is probably yes.

[Marrah_G]

12. I believe they will.

[bigwillq]

14. I believe that ground troops are certainly a possibility

hopefully not, but a possibility depending on how this mission unfolds.

[cheapdate]

15. I don't. The president stated firmly that wouldn't and I believe him.

Although nobody can possibly know for sure.

[Fred Sanders]

19. Fighting troops are not necessary, if they are let the folks in the area do it. How come no question

about WHO else could fight on the ground? Why America?

I too believe Obama, the MIC is aghast at the notion.

[totodeinhere]

21. The question is who besides Americans can stand up to ISIS rather than throwing down

their weapons and running like the so-called Iraqi Army did. You say the Kurds? They are only interested in defending their own territory and they will not fight to liberate non Kurdish areas.

[cheapdate]

22. I believe there's actually a huge discussion of who could fight on the ground.

Iraqi Kurds and Syrian rebels are fighting on the ground. There are discussions about how, and to what extent, to give them arms. Lots of talk about how to get the regular Iraqi army more involved.

MIC wins either way. Also, the new survelillance-industrial-complex are big winners.

[NealK]

16. There are already troups over there

but they are called military advisers and security contractors (aka mercs).

[still_one]

17. and 61% of the Americans believe there should be daily prayer in public schools

[totodeinhere]

20. Yes many Americans support prayer in schools. But the point here is that a majority of Americans do

not believe President Obama when he promises that there will be no boots on the ground. And frankly I don't believe him either. I am not going to blindly follow him just because he has a "D" next to his name.

[still_one]

24. The public are wrong about public prayer in schools, and about most every other thing since they

rely on most of their misinformation from the MSM

[totodeinhere]

26. The public is getting a lot of things right too. Every poll I have seen now shows majority

support for gay marriage for instance. I would not write off public opinion just because of the MSM because sometimes the public does get it right.

[still_one]

28. yeah, that is why they voted bush two terms. They are not right most of the time

[totodeinhere]

32. They did not vote for Bush two times. Both elections were stolen.

But they did vote for Obama twice.

[TwilightGardener]

30. It's not a matter of not believing him. It's a recognition that the situation may turn into

a ground war for us, if he isn't careful--there is a lot of pressure on him to make this war much bigger.

[totodeinhere]

33. Either we commit ground troops or we don't. It's that simple.

He promised no boots on the ground. He didn't qualify his promise by saying that the situation may turn into a ground war for us. He was quite definitive that there would be no ground troops. And so if he puts in boots on the ground then has has broken that promise. And we would be involved in yet another quagmire that we cannot win in the long run.

[TwilightGardener]

34. No, it's not that simple. The distinction Obama is making is whether our troops will

PRIMARILY be doing the patrols, the raids, the shooting, the holding of ground--or having advisors and special forces and combat controllers embedded to assist the Iraqis and Kurds to do the patrols, the raids, the shooting, and the holding of ground. There are, and always will, be "boots on the ground", in any military operation--special forces, advance teams, intel, support. That's quite a different war than entire infantry brigades. I don't know why people are upset or hung up over Obama's plans, I think his strategy so far is the best of many bad options.

[dipsydoodle]

27. Special forces

.

[TwilightGardener]

29. That's because there's a relentless drumbeat in the media that we'll just never

"win" without American combat troops. Of course, that would be a very unwise decision, since the sectarian/political situation in Iraq and Syria would just turn our troops into shooting and IED targets all over again, but anything short of a Petraeus-style "clear hold build" surgetastic surge will be called "halfhearted" by the usual neocon (and neo-lib) suspects and retired military officers. The best thing we can do is pressure the Iraqi government to get the Sunni tribes on board, and to tighten up their military (the ones who will actually fucking fight instead of run away), and then provide them as much intel and guidance as they need. Keep arming and working with the Kurds, in Iraq and Syria. Use the threat of supporting an independent Kurdistan as a stick to get Turkey and the Iraqi government to get their shit together and fight. Because really, Iraq will collapse and divide if things keep going the way they're going, and Turkey is going to have never-ending refugees if they don't start fucking helping out.

[whereisjustice]

31. And 99% of Americans believe the US Govt. will do whatever the other 1% tells them to do.

[ZombieHorde]

35. 72% of polled USAers think President Obama is a liar?

No way! Politicians are known as bastions of truth and wholesome goodness. /sarcasm