Regardless of the soundness of the president's strategy, to ensure greater success in defeating ISIS, three distinct interlinked aspects must be factored in. Acting accordingly will permanently degrade ISIS and prevent it from rising again to pose a serious threat to our allies in the Middle East and Western security in the future.
Nearly a week has passed since President Obama at last announced his tardy strategy for dealing with Isis, the jihadist organization Obama now calls a huge threat only months after dismissing it as the "junior varsity" of jihadism. There's been no shortage of activity, as distinguished from action, from the Obama administration.
Largely an exercise in fantasy, like the longest-running science fiction show on the planet, NATO, since the end of the Soviet superpower erased the Cold War fear of a Red Army surge through the heart of Western Europe to the Bay of Biscay, has been an institution in search of a new mission and an accident waiting to happen.
Until now, President Obama's foreign policy appeared to be based more on reason than emotion. However, the rise of ISIL may have cost Obama his equanimity. After promising to strictly limit the mission in Iraq, Washington is preparing to expand the war to Syria. Instead, the administration should push other nations into the lead.
Northern Iraq is rich with oil and natural gas and what is playing out is a battle for these resources by the Kurds and Sunnis in the wake of the departure of Baghdad's control and army. In effect we have become the Kurdish Air Force in protecting the gains the Kurds have made since this crisis began in June.