[lifeofgrace]

So is he suggesting that we do nothing or that we send the army in and invade Syria?

Either of those two options would be orders of magnitude better than what we are doing. It would not take a full-scale invasion of Syria to degrade and disarm ISIS.

Taking back the oilfields in Iraq (with existing Kurd regiments) would be a good start. Finding ISIS money-making operations and destroying them, along with weapons caches is another step. Neither of those means "full scale invasion". But I don't see us doing it so never mind.

[DoodleDawg]

Either of those two options would be orders of magnitude better than what we are doing. It would not take a full-scale invasion of Syria to degrade and disarm ISIS.

What would it take?

Taking back the oilfields in Iraq (with existing Kurd regiments) would be a good start.

Now I'm confused because isn't that what this guy is talking about? "Pay others to fight?" I don't have a problem with arming the Kurds and letting them take on ISIS. They seem to be the only ones with the motivation to fight and win. But the author of this peace calls that cowardly. So aren't you supporting the cowardly path?

Finding ISIS money-making operations and destroying them, along with weapons caches is another step.

You can dry up ISIS funds through the international financial community. You don't need troops on the ground to do that.