A clear majority of Americans support escalating their country's fight against ISIS - but simultaneously oppose the notion of sending ground troops to the Middle East to take on the jihadists....It's been known for a while that Americans oppose another ground war -- but only "a slim majority" wants an increase in airstrikes? Even though 60% want more invested in a military response? What the hell would such a response consist of, for Americans who don't want ground troops and are squeamish about airstrikes?
60% of Americans supported investing more in the military campaign against ISIS, with a slim majority favoring increased airstrikes. However, a clear majority opposed sending special forces or other ground troops to Iraq and Syria.
Maybe more special forces, in lieu of regular ground troops? Um, no:
Asked whether the United States should dispatch special forces - something President Obama has already done, albeit on a very small scale - opposition stood at 65%. But that number increased further when asked whether the US should deploy regular ground troops, with a full 76% opposed.So to sum up: When it comes to ISIS, Americans don't want ground troops, don't want special forces, and are skittish about increasing the number of airstrikes -- but they're solidly in favor of a more aggressive military response.
Right. Got it.
I guess that would explain why, when Reuters/Ipsos asks Americans which party has the better plan for fighting terrorism, Republicans beat Democrats, 30%-18%. ("Don't know" beats both Republicans and Democrats, with 33%.) Republicans prevail over Democrats because the Republicans' plan for dealing with ISIS is to say "Obama sucks" and leave it at that. This level of specificity seems to be just fine with a plurality of Americans.
5 comments:
Give our conservatives time.
It's tough to sell a new war at Holiday time, when people are looking to stuff themselves with turkey and football, and are preparing their attack strategy for their Black Friday per-dawn attack, and Christmas shopping over the ensuing weeks.
And then returning all of the shit that they don't want and/or need.
After the New Year, look for the conservatives to market a new Middle East adventure to the people and our gullible, cowardly, compliant, and complicit MSM!
We should team up with the Russians, who come through Aleppo, the Jordanians and Saudis come from the south. The Kurds come from the East and the Iraqis...well they can form a blocking force near Ramadi.
The Saudis pay the bill for everything. We send in one armoured division using the forward located equipment, drop the 82 and airlift the 101. Put the 3rd ID in reserve. We are good at killing. We should kill a lot of crazy jihadis.
Assad steps down, we split Syria and Iraq into five states by the major groups. Kurds, Shi'a, Sunni, allawite and Christian/druze. Have Russian and Jordanians and maybe Pakistan UN peacekeepers.
Daesh needs destroying and now is the time.
Bit of a tangent here, but Joey raises an excellent point I have often pondered: why are the white dogs enemies with Russia? The Russians are European just like the rest of you, their hatred and love of killing dark skins as strong as America's, why are you enemies? You should be buddies. Best buddies. Butt buddies. There are a lot more dark skins in this atmosphere than light.
the members of the Corps
all hate the thought of war
"We'd rather kill them off by peaceful means"
-Tom Lehrer
Joey Blau - Why don't you and Donald Trump go on over there and get that operation up and running? You have King Salman's number?
Post a Comment