War...

[Baby Tran Cat]

First things first...I have ZERO military background...have never studied wartime philosophy or tactics...nor have I ever sat with anyone and had them teach me anything.

That being said...it seems to me that if the US is going to war with ISIS that we would want to unleash absolutely everything we have and completely overwhelm and annihilate the enemy. While tactical airstrikes would be a part of it, I fail to see how this will wipe ISIS off the face of the earth. Is that not the goal of war? Is this because this type of war is different being a lot of urban fighting?

Anyone have any military background that could shed some light on this for me?

[Oleander Kayaker]

Limiting collateral damage will be a major issue. Israel did a pretty good job with their recent action, considering Hamas uses civilians for shelter from bombing. ISIS will do the same thing. It's difficult to fight an enemy that has a disparate concern for life than most other folk.

Ground troops will be necessary to root out ISIS troops. Which is why the U.S. is opting to send advisors to train Kurds and others to be the boots on the ground.

I'd expect the U.S. will also do command/control of ground ops, with AWACS. The airbases are already set-up in Saudi (been there, done that).

It's also interesting to see that the Saudis are allowing use of the bases for the U.S. to train anti-ISIS militia. The Saudi majority is Sunni, as is ISIS.

[Oleander Kayaker]

The second and third week of October will be interesting. The Haij (in Saudi) will be during this time.

[boom]

Funny, we didn't worry about collateral damages in WWII and we won. On top of an obvious victory, 70 years later the countries that we crushed are some of our few allies today. Level every single site that there are ISIL, AlQueda, etc. Leave the bodies for them to clean up. Destroy their Mosques, carpet bomb their cities, their schools, their neighborhoods or anywhere ISIL thinks that they are safe. If Muslims want to practice their religion they will have to control their own extremists.

[Oleander Kayaker]

During WWII, we didn't have laser guided weapons, aerial/satellite command/intelligence platforms.

The radius of precision has dramatically decreased (and accuracy increased) with new weapons systems, so it's "expected" that collateral damage can be minimized, hence the terror strategy to hide behind grandma and the kids.

But, you're right, the deterrent value is gone. The bad guys know to hide within where collateral damage is unacceptable.

I agree that for far too long the U.S. has been coerced into policing somebody else's extremists. This time, the current policy has some merit. We'll oversee the boots on the ground, but they won't be ours. Unfortunately the boots on the ground will likely be pretty ineffectual. Arabs are lousy at disciplined soldiering, if they are not an extremist.

[boom]

When the threat from US munitions becomes greater than the threat from ISIL the locals will give them up, it doesn't matter how advanced the weaponry.

[Oleander Kayaker]

When the threat from US munitions becomes greater than the threat from ISIL the locals will give them up, it doesn't matter how advanced the weaponry.

I'd gather that's what kind of happened in Gaza recently.

[Robalo]

WAR-I like many of their songs. As far as turning things into shiny glass from the heat caused by our bombs, bomb 'em all-civilians and fighters. We lost in Nam because the civilians were also the enemy and leaders failed to recognize that. Tunnels all over Saigon even when we were there. Or just send Obama there and let him be their King-solves many problems-ours and theirs.

[Oleander Kayaker]

Or just send Obama there and let him be their King-solves many problems-ours and theirs.

Per the polls, about 68% of the populace agree with you. LOL

[Cuda340]

...so with "precision munitions" it takes someone on the ground to "paint" the target right? So I guess we are going to hand over what is needed to have a target taken out to the almost "BAD GUYS" that according to Obama are now going to be our allies?

[Oleander Kayaker]

Yup, just think of the possibilities...

Obama is heeding the following advice:
“Your Worst Enemy Could Be Your Best Friend & Your Best Friend Your Worst Enemy” Bob Marley

[KennyWayne]

I would have thought all of the trucks with '50s mounted in the back would have been taken out while the speech was going on. They got it all wrong, POtus doesn't need a strategy, just a goal and let the military form the strategy to accomplish that goal.

[trseato]

First things first...I have ZERO military background...have never studied wartime philosophy or tactics...nor have I ever sat with anyone and had them teach me anything.

That being said...it seems to me that if the US is going to war with ISIS that we would want to unleash absolutely everything we have and completely overwhelm and annihilate the enemy. While tactical airstrikes would be a part of it, I fail to see how this will wipe ISIS off the face of the earth. Is that not the goal of war? Is this because this type of war is different being a lot of urban fighting?

Anyone have any military background that could shed some light on this for me?

I guess you haven't heard!
Rice: It's Not a War Because We Don't Have Combat Boots on the Ground

[Robalo]

Only Kerry is saying it's not a "war" all others are saying it is a war. Sheez not even a consensus in Oba's own admin as to what to call it. We're screwed.