The civil war in Syria has evolved into a global issue. With the rise of ISIS, what started out as a civil war has turned into a continuing problem in the global war on terror. ISIS has proven that they are capable of carrying out atrocities anywhere at any time. The recent attacks in Paris are proof that they are as crazy as they are despicable. This is a well-organized group with a financial and geographical foundation. Now is the time for world leaders to coordinate and eradicate this threat, and it starts with Syria.
The big question in all of this is: what should we do? Airstrikes have been going on for well over a year and there does not seem to be any progress in regard to stopping ISIS' capability to carry out attacks in the Middle East and elsewhere around the globe.
Should we then stop conducting airstrikes? No. Airstrikes are an integral aspect of battlefield success. Using airstrikes as a means to support Kurdish and Iraqi forces against ISIS has direct influence on the outcome of battles. Taking out high-value targets with airstrikes prevents us from having to put boots on the ground to take out these targets. But ISIS' biggest advantage against air strikes is that they are more of an idea than a nation. No amount of bombs can completely destroy an idea. They have proven that they can recover from defeats and there are those among their ranks who will happily fill a spot left vacant by a leader killed in an airstrike. So what needs to change?
I definitely agree with President Barack Obama's advisers that major troop commitment would not be prudent. There are still ways for us to expand our involvement. The plan to train local forces at the expense of hundreds of millions of dollars yielded miserable results. Things like this happen. The best thing to take from that experience is to learn from it; what can we do better in the future? Training Kurdish and Iraqi forces, even Syrian forces unaffiliated with ISIS can still be a successful strategy if implemented effectively. This would require a bigger commitment of advisers which means more troops and more money. The deployment of potentially tens of thousands of troops is expensive in terms of money and American lives.
So now the question remains, how do you beat an idea rather than a nation or just a group of people? ISIS makes millions of dollars a month by selling oil reserves that they have acquired. There are a few ways to stop their income. The trucks carrying this oil could be targeted in strikes. The oil fields could be recaptured and held by a coalition of foreign troops. Or people could simply stop buying their oil which likely is not going to happen. Destroying the trucks carrying their product is a simpler solution than the other two, especially one that would require troop deployment.
