Americans support strikes on ISIS, even if the campaign last three years. Yahoo/Reuters.

An ISIS fighter in Mosul. Yahoo/Reuters

A new poll shows that 2/3rds of American support strikes on ISIS. Yahoo/Reuters. The online poll, conducted by Reuters, shows that 64% of Americans support the airstrikes against ISIS fighters. Support drops to a slim majority, 53%, if the strikes were to last for two or three years with 28% opposed. Support for deploying ground troops to fight in direct combat was almost non-existent with only 9% of the people polled saying that ground combat was the best way to fight ISIS. The poll was conducted after Obama's speech on Wednesday.  

My Comment:

I'm not too surprised about these results. Americans are rightly scared about ISIS and more then a little worried about another terror attack. Those people that weren't paying attention to ISIS before they executed two american journalists are certainly paying attention now. Airstrikes are considered safe and low risk and people may think that they will actually work. Nobody wants to fight ISIS on the ground though. American are sick of war and the obvious cost in lives and treasure.

What's my take? I agree that airstrikes are the most palatable option, but my question is are they really going to be effective? Airstrikes can support troops on the ground and disrupt and terrorize your enemies but what you need to defeat a standing army is an army. The United States has always overestimated the power of airstrikes. They won't be enough to win the war. What we need is boots on the ground. Of course who on Earth will fight ISIS? Iraq and Syria are trying but both their armies are demoralized and weak. The Kurds fight too, but their combat power has been overestimated. Iran has some forces deployed as well but not nearly enough. Obama wants to train the Free Syrian Army but they will spend more time fighting the Syrian regime. There just isn't a highly trained professional army available right now, at least one that a government is willing to deploy.

Airstrikes are a half measure. What is needed is a ground invasion. But I can't see America, Europe or anyone else sending in more then token forces. All these airstrikes will accomplish is the appearance of doing something. It won't be enough... On the other hand I'm pretty sick of America being the one that always has to solve these problems. ISIS is a much bigger problem for Europe then it is for America. Maybe it's time they start carrying their fair share.