Posted on Oct 12, 2014
Will the US officially have boots on the ground in Iraq battling ISIS?
4.13K
16
9
3
3
0
I think before all is said and done, we will officially be in combat against ISIS in Iraq.
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 9
"Officially", not until the next occupant of the oval office gets comfortable and can blame it on Obummer. "Unofficially", they are probably there embedded with Syrian and Iraqi defense forces as we speak.
(4)
(0)
Sadly, I have to agree - and it will be sooner rather than later IMHO. If we had a proper exit strategy after OIF (instead of just a date on the calendar), things may have been better over there. But that no longer matters because what was done is done.
Ultimately, the current CINC has no one to blame but himself and his administration for the challenges over there. I suspect we'll be sending the troops in by the end of this year.
Ultimately, the current CINC has no one to blame but himself and his administration for the challenges over there. I suspect we'll be sending the troops in by the end of this year.
(2)
(0)
I agree With MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca unofficially, they are probably already there under the guise of advisers.
I think the president will continue the course for political reasons. I am not certain he will be able to hold off on putting boots on the ground. As president, he actually has good reason to. The terrorists have made specific threats against the United States. In my opinion, they have declared war directly against the US, and the president should respond appropriately. I do not think that boots on the ground at the moment is the answer, however, I think whatever the answer is should be decided without a political agenda (I know, impossible)
ISIS is spreading and so is their influence, and I think the president is going to have to do more than supplying opposition terrorists groups.
I think the president will continue the course for political reasons. I am not certain he will be able to hold off on putting boots on the ground. As president, he actually has good reason to. The terrorists have made specific threats against the United States. In my opinion, they have declared war directly against the US, and the president should respond appropriately. I do not think that boots on the ground at the moment is the answer, however, I think whatever the answer is should be decided without a political agenda (I know, impossible)
ISIS is spreading and so is their influence, and I think the president is going to have to do more than supplying opposition terrorists groups.
(1)
(0)
The 82nd ABN is inbound in the near future so I'm going to go with "unofficially yes." It's not supposed to be a combat mission but an advise/assist mission, but we'll see how that turns out. As MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca said in his own response I'd be surprised if we didn't have operators there already doing their thing.
(1)
(0)
BO will go kicking and screaming before he allows combat troops back into Iraq and if he relents, he will blame the pentagon. But nothing will stop him from sending combat troops to Liberia to battle Ebola.
(1)
(0)
Throughout history air power alone has not defeated the enemy. And the administration is now admitting the air skrikes are not having any effect. So it was just a matter of time before it would come down to troops. But they can spin it any way they wish we have combat troops on the ground now, period.
(1)
(0)
SFC(P) (Join to see) I believe it is inevitable. All the rhetoric and the elections coming up. I think any action or political controversial decision cannot be made 90 days before or after an election.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next

ISIS
