In the past month, the US has assisted the Kurdish and Iraqi military forces in their fight against ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, which is not a recognized state and is an enemy of Iraq). America's military has launched "more than 130" airstrikes against ISIS. Today, Obama announced a plan for the US to take an offensive against ISIS, with an intent to "systematically degrade their capabilities" and to "reduce the territory they control".
Currently, Obama has no plan to put ground troops into the fight against ISIS. On the subject of ground troops, he said "this is not the equivalent of the Iraq War." Besides not using ground troops, this military offensive will differ from the Iraq War in that the US has indisputable evidence of wrongdoing by ISIS (notably executions of US journalists).
Questions:
1. US attempts to defeat opposing governments in the Middle East have historically led to much anger against the US for playing "world police." However, many Islamic states support this effort against ISIS. Does the US stand to gain diplomatically from its efforts?
2. Using airstrikes saves the lives of many US soldiers would otherwise risk being killed in combat. However, airstrikes are imprecise and inevitably end up killing civilians, as was seen in Gaza. Is it ethical for the US to use them in this situation?
Sources:
BBC
New York Times
Open Thread: Big Talk Butters No Parsnips
1 week ago

