Sound Off: Should the US Commit Ground Troops to Fight ISIS?


The Paris attacks made it clear that United States efforts to bomb ISIS out of existence aren’t working.

Now members of Congress want us to invade Syria and engage in ground combat against a group that calls itself a state but, in reality, functions more like a marauding gang than an actual government that provides services and protection for its citizens.And then there’s the counterargument: much of the ISIS influence is online. The Paris attacks were mostly carried out by French and Belgian citizens. Invading Syria might trigger counterattacks by sleeper cells in cities all over Europe (and possibly here in the United States.)

Abdelhamid Abaaoud (pictured above in a recruitment video in which he’s driving a car and dragging bodies behind) seems a great focus for our collective anger. He’s getting credit as the mastermind behind these attacks and he comes off as the kind of smug, obnoxious punk most of us would like to punch in the face a few times before we took him out. But he’s no Saddam Hussein. ISIS is a far more chaotic foe than we’ve faced before.

So we turn it over to you: you’re the Commander in Chief. Is it time to commit ground troops in Syria? Remember, many veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan want to know if you have a post-invasion plan for a new Syrian regime. How should we proceed after we complete the invasion?

The men and women who serve don’t care about your politics. They want a clear objective for this mission. What’s your plan? Sound off!