Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Tactical Operations that will directly defeat ISIS watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    If you had command of the current available military hardware and personnel what sort of military operation would you put together that would defeat ISIS as a military power. I realize we'll still have terrorism to deal with but some feel if we can destroy them militarily they will lose their appeal to those who commit terrorist acts in their name
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by oldercon1953)
    If you had command of the current available military hardware and personnel what sort of military operation would you put together that would defeat ISIS as a military power. I realize we'll still have terrorism to deal with but some feel if we can destroy them militarily they will lose their appeal to those who commit terrorist acts in their name
    https://www.wikiwand.com/en/UGM-133_Trident_II
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Unfortuntately, there are quite a lot of misguided people who seem to think stopping air strikes (and therefore allowing ISIS to operate and move their forces with impunity) is somehow a great way to defeat them. Including a terrible Guardian article recently.

    Personally, I'd just keep up with the current policy, as it is making progress. I would like to see renewed focus on diplomacy between the Syrian government and rebels - if that conflict could be resolved (or, as is more likely than ending that war, made less intense) then defeating ISIS militarily would be easier. I'd also like to see more support to the Syrian Kurds in particular, as they are very lightly armed.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    To actually defeat them? Little aside from running them over with a large army or a very large bomb will do the trick.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    Put bacon in their sandwiches
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RF_PineMarten)
    Unfortuntately, there are quite a lot of misguided people who seem to think stopping air strikes (and therefore allowing ISIS to operate and move their forces with impunity) is somehow a great way to defeat them. Including a terrible Guardian article recently.

    Personally, I'd just keep up with the current policy, as it is making progress. I would like to see renewed focus on diplomacy between the Syrian government and rebels - if that conflict could be resolved (or, as is more likely than ending that war, made less intense) then defeating ISIS militarily would be easier. I'd also like to see more support to the Syrian Kurds in particular, as they are very lightly armed.
    I agree with you regarding airstrikes.
    re; current policy; It's just too slow. If ISIS is squeezed slowly it has time and an intact command structure to plan and carry out foreign military operations. I'm taking them at their word that they have several thousand soldiers stationed in Europe and the U.S. I have heard that their recruitment numbers are down. ISIS needs victories that will capture the headlines and hold them to attract new recruits. My guess is that an attack on a very large scale is a certainty. If the areas that they occupy are steamrolled over ala, Desert Storm, the army will be thrown into disarray to some extent. This makes it hard to communicate, making an orderly retreat difficult. Also, a drawn out victory makes it easier for greater numbers to escape.
    As far as the Syrian civil war goes your right, it's not going to end soon and the only way I can see to maybe dial it down would be to enlist the Russians to help defeat ISIS. This would at least refocus their attention for a brief period. The Russians and the U.S. as allies may seem laughable now but if ISIS executes attacks on the scale I'm envisioning the Russians may feel it's in their best interests to cooperate.
    Aside from the fact that the Kurds are lightly armed, even with military aid I've heard they just don't have the stomach or the numbers to do the job quickly enough or decisively enough.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by oldercon1953)
    Aside from the fact that the Kurds are lightly armed, even with military aid I've heard they just don't have the stomach or the numbers to do the job quickly enough or decisively enough.
    That's interesting. It's the complete opposite of everything I've ever read or heard about the Kurds. They've been by far the most effective faction at resisting ISIS attacks and also at putting them to the sword. They're only reluctance is at carrying on the offensive after Kurdish lands have been liberated as they frankly don't give a toss about Arabs.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    support bashar al assad and the kurds and create a settlement so create a new kurdish state. for the record im not particularly pro kurd but theyve sacraficed more than anyone else to combat isis and theres no proof assad used nuclear weapons. i see those strong liberal (comparatively ) leaders as the best way to control the middle east, like in Jordan. democracy generally doesnt work in Islamic countries.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    That's interesting. It's the complete opposite of everything I've ever read or heard about the Kurds. They've been by far the most effective faction at resisting ISIS attacks and also at putting them to the sword. They're only reluctance is at carrying on the offensive after Kurdish lands have been liberated as they frankly don't give a toss about Arabs.
    We're in agreement. Fending off attacks, which the Kurds are capable of ,is far different from mounting a coordinated offensive action. The point you make in your last sentence pretty much disqualifies them
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Undoubtedly air strikes have slowed and significantly prevented ISIL from further territorial expansion, however without an effective ground force defeating ISIL with air strikes alone is fool's play. In Iraq you somewhat have a coalition of Shiite militias, popular mobilisation units made up of conscripts, the regular army and special forces, as well as the Kurds. Unless ISIL make some sort of a surprise comeback in Iraq by for example, recapturing a city they lost, I do not see the need to direct foreign forces to defeat ISIS. The real question is whether or not the Iraqi forces can hold the ground they gain and get the approval of the Sunni community which will require internal political reform. The real danger is in Syria, I think unquestionably to take down ISIS you need modern heavy weapons, particularly artillery. The Kurds, most effective fighting force against ISIS in Syria, lack heavy artillery and are fighting pretty much with courage and old light Soviet era weapons. The tremendous success they have had however only goes to show that had we seriously supplied them with better artillery which allowed them to take on ISIL positions without close quarters engagement, ISIL would be a far less potent militia on the ground. However there's also an issue with elements within the Syrian rebellion, some of whom are ideologically sympathetic to ISIL and could quite easily take ISIL's place. Make no mistakes, despite its propaganda, ISIL is not as well equipped as we think they are. The strength of ISIL is in its ability to ruthlessly terrorise populations and thus hold territories. ISIL may have a steady stream of foreign fighters but a good deal of them, especially the ones from Western Europe, are untrained and it appears as if the hardened jihadists are from Saudi Arabia, Tunisia and other surrounding countries where Al Qaeda has a presence (meaning the fighters probably transitioned into ISIS). Any military with good training, decent armored vehicles and enough artillery backed by air can remove ISIS from the areas they control (the conventional definition of military victory), but what happens after is something which has no clear cut answer (i.e Do ISIL continue as an insurgency as they originally started out? Do they carry out more attacks in Europe?).


    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.