Opinion from the desk of the Editor:

That my friends is the $64 billion question.

Everybody has an opinion on how the Us should go about fight the Islamic State (IS)………the problem is that No one has an idea to fight them….just an opinion that we should.  Everything to this point has beem nothing more than talking points to appease the public and to hopefully start a small theater of support.

There is NO definite plan….or as the president said, “no strategy”…….and boy did he take grief over telling the people the truth….to show what I am talking about…..here are the points to combat IS as issued in a joint statement from State and DOD…….

To be effective, an international coalition to defeat ISIL must coordinate across multiple lines of effort. These include:

• Military support to our Iraqi partners;
• Stopping the flow of foreign fighters;
• Countering ISIL’s financing and funding;
• Addressing humanitarian crises; and
• De-legitimizing ISIL’s ideology.

Nothing in that that sounds like a plan, at least to me…..how about you?

But the prez and his boyz are not the only vague losers poppin’ their chops…….this from the plan from the Arab League……..

Arab League foreign ministers agreed on Sunday to take all necessary measures to confront Islamic State and cooperate with international, regional and national efforts to combat militants who have overrun swathes of Iraq and Syria.

The Arab League also endorsed in the closing statement of its meeting in Cairo a UN Security Council resolution passed last month calling on member states to “act to suppress the flow of foreign fighters, financing and other support to Islamist extremist groups in Iraq and Syria.”

So far we gots NOTHING…..we have talk and that is about as far as it has gone……but wait!  The president has put together a Coalition of the Clueless…..a coalition that appeared while he was at the NATO meeting in Wales……

After taking grief for saying the US lacks a strategy in the fight against the Islamic State, President Obama sought to fix that yesterday by lining up nine nations at the NATO summit in a new coalition. The other nine are Britain, Australia, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, and Turkey, reports the BBC. As the Guardian points out, one key weakness is that only one Muslim nation—Turkey—is in the mix, which is why John Kerry will head to the Middle East to try to add more before a UN Security Council meeting later this month. For Obama, the strategy “echoes the war on terror developed by his predecessor, George W. Bush, more than a decade ago,” observes the New York Times.

Obama’s plan: “You initially push them back, you systematically degrade their capabilities, you narrow their scope of action, you slowly shrink the space, the territory that they may control, you take out their leadership.” For now, that means continued airstrikes—though not in Syria, at least for now—and more support for groups fighting ISIS in Iraq and Syria. Success will likely hinge on the Arab component: getting a government in place in Iraq, and then convincing leaders in Baghdad to cooperate with nations such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar, writes Doyle McManus at the LA Times. But he sees it as a “sensible beginning—and an important test of whether US military intervention with a light footprint can be made to work.”

If I were Turkey I would be aware that they, the coalition, will turn to Turkey to be the ground forces hammer against IS….why?  They share a common border and they will be the force they need.  Denmark, France, Canada and Germany I would not count on them for the use of force….they will hide behind the humanitarian side of the conflict.  Poland will be busy worrying about Russia’s next move after they are finished with Ukraine….

The idea of a coalition is a great feel good tactic but I do not see it accomplishing much at all.

Does anyone see this as the answer to the rise influence of the Islamic State?

I’m listening.