Previous posts in this discussion:
Poston the IS Threat (Tor Guimaraes, USA, 08/26/14 5:03 am)
Enrique Torner (25 August) seems to be more interested in partisan politics than facts.
As JE pointed out, "the Democrat-Republican disjunction falls apart when it comes to war--or at least until the present century." Let's not phrase this as a "classic disagreement between Democrats and Republicans." Besides, I know many die-hard Republicans who want our troops home and us minding our bigger problems right here.
Enrique wrote: "Iraq was under control until Obama decided to withdraw our troops; then IS took advantage of that, and they took over Iraq." This is a myth. Since Al-Qaeda Sunni factions deliberately started attacking Shiites in a major civil war, Iraq has been an uncontrollable madhouse. The only semblance of control was by the Kurds in the North and the Iranians and their proxies in Baghdad. The US troops were targeted by everyone except the Kurds. Furthermore, while IS quickly took a major chunk of Iraq, it is now being squeezed out slowly but systematically by Iranians, Iraqi Shiites, and Kurds, with heavy assistance from the US.
Enrique further wrote: "I would like to see Obama talk other world leaders into forming a coalition to get rid of IS, instead of continuing to play golf and enjoying his vacation." Obama has already done that, as much as possible. Enrique, please stop your partisanship; it detracts from your arguments.
Finally, Enrique wrote: "I don't think the Kurds and their neighbors can handle IS by themselves, as we've seen so far."
I see it differently; IS expansion days are over. The US direct assistance and the odd combination of Syria, Iran, Iraqi Shiites, and Kurds will do the job of slowly destroying IS.
JE comments: Still, IS will be a difficult pest to eradicate (contained is more realistic). They are extremely wealthy and are seen by many Iraqi Sunnis as "their" movement. On the topic of public support, Northern Ireland's example may be instructive. See John Heelan, next in queue.