General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Do you agree with the Obama administration that ISIS is an "imminent threat"? [View all]MineralMan
(150,437 posts)in Middle East conflicts. We have not done well with them in the past, mostly because we have a very poor understanding of the region. I still believe that to be true. In an ideal case, the nations in that region should be the ones stepping up to deal with the current situation. Some are involved. More need to be.
At the same time, we do have means in place we can use to selectively attack terrorist forces without using U.S. soldiers to do on-ground operations. To that extent, I believe we can act. In fact, we are doing so. The problem with that is identifying targets for air operations. If targets are not clearly identified, we run the risk of attacking people who are not the correct targets. That's always a risk, in the best of circumstances, but it is magnified in this situation.
I suppose we will continue much as we have already done. So far, we haven't done badly, but I don't have any substantial information about the effectiveness of our operations, really. I don't expect to have that information, either.
Should we be the sole international enforcer? Well, no, we shouldn't. That's clear. Should we be participants? That depends, I suppose, on many factors I don't know enough about.
So, I abstain.