By Jonathan Gougisha (Senior)
ISIS, or the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, is a terrorist group in the Middle East that strongly oppresses the Islamic religion. This group has become a focus of the United States after beheading a number of American journalists.
Although the president continuously says “no boots on the ground”, troops may have to enter Syria if ISIS continues to grow. The United States has already been at war in Iraq, and should not return. In the New York Times article, “Drones and the Democracy Disconnect”, it describes how sending ground troops will lead to “suffering casualties” and make ISIS “politically powerful and appealing.” These are only small side effects of sending ground troops to Iraq and Syria.
“Drones lead the way and dominate the fight against the several non-state actors we now engage” (New York Times). The previous quote stresses the need for alternatives for ground troops. Drones will prevent deaths of U.S. troops, and are a much easier way to fight ISIS. As said in the New York Times, drones “enable us to fight ISIS without getting ground troops involved.” ISIS is a growing group, and drones can deplete their numbers without depleting ours. Obama focuses on the fact that the life of a soldier is worth more than the life of a drone.
Although philosopher Niccolo Machiavelli says that field war “is the most necessary and honorable of all wars,” he is wrong because in this situation, field war will lead to the death of American soldiers. Barack Obama stated that “These strikes have helped save the lives of millions of innocent men and women,” which shows that drones are preserving those who fight for our country. Drones will result in less Americans risking their lives against ISIS. This is the best solution for the United States.
Barack Obama’s approach towards ISIS is the best approach. Sending drones instead of ground troops will keep American soldiers alive. Any plan that incorporates the destruction of ISIS, and not Americans, is the right way to go.