General view of the scene with rescue service personnel working near covered bodies outside the Le Carillon restaurant following shooting incidents in Paris, France, November 13, 2015. Reuters/Philippe Wojazer
Reuters: Exclusive: After Paris, Americans want U.S. to do more to attack Islamic State - poll
A majority of Americans want the United States to intensify its assault on the Islamic State following the Paris attacks, but most remain opposed to sending troops to Iraq or Syria, where the militant group is based, a Reuters/Ipsos poll found.
That view runs counter to comments by some 2016 Republican presidential candidates like former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, who called on Monday for more U.S. "troops on the ground" in the region. After years of prolonged conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan, Americans appear reluctant to become embroiled in another war even as they push for more action.
The poll - conducted over the weekend after the suicide bomb and shootings in Paris - also found that 63 percent of Americans were fearful that a Paris-style attack could happen near them, suggesting that national security could emerge as a theme in the campaign for the November 2016 presidential election.
Update: Poll: Americans want more action against ISIS, but oppose ground troops -- The Hill
WNU Editor: This explains President Obama's refusal to deploy ground forces into Syria ....
.... Sixty-five percent oppose sending special forces to the region, and an even greater number — 76 percent — oppose sending conventional ground troops.
5 comments:
If they did not oppose sending troops, Obaa would be in the 30s as far as poll #s.
It cost's Canada $34 million a month to mostly take GBU bombs on a CF-118 scenic airial tour of Kuwait and Iraq, rarely being dropped.
In contrast, the Ground Forces element runs a Surgical Center, trains 6 Kurdish medics a month, ( the Kurds mostly don't have medics, they throw you on a truck and haul you off to a hospital, most fighters die in transit of treatable wounds), and the JTSF 2 crew who train about 500 fighters in tactics, IED disposal and building breach, for the low, low cost of $2 million a month.
Until it happens in new york then as usual the stable door will be closed after the horse as bolted.
Either there is a war on terror on not, there must be a political will to accept military casualties to safe guard the homeland.
As terrible as losing 6000 men security will not come cheap.
ok, fine, leave the medics but the Squirrels can come home.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/breaking-jan-26/article22633741/?service=mobile
It the above mentioned crap I can't stand. Sending advisors or trainers that end up fighting enemies supported by so called allies. It's BS Jay, whatever the cost, and the effort would be better directed at outing and confronting said "allies".
Like that s#@@ in Afghanistan
All that effort to end up hearing the Taliban are peace partners or some such foolishness. We have to learn to stay out of situations like this even if it means offending "allies".
Post a Comment