The problem is we are now starting to arm what is known or what we have been told is moderate secular Islamic rebels. Some 5,000 of them which will not be available for at least a year. But even if they were, the numbers do not add up. 5,000 against ISIS's 30,000 and growing along with our moderate secular Islamic force taking on Assad's 250,000 man force and some other rebel groups all at the same time.
Perhaps we can get the Iraqi Army reconstituted, but if they are like what we seen so far...
Who does that really leave? NATO isn't going to commit troops, not Turkey. The Kurds will fight, but not far from their homeland. Iraq as a nation means nothing to them, they want their own homeland, country. But our NATO ally Turkey says no way. Other Arab nations, will they provide troops? I think not.
Perhaps we are in a corner here, where do we turn to for those troops that can push home the advantage our air strikes will give them? I see only one source at the moment. Perhaps not a nice source, perhaps even a force that would keep a tyrant in power. Perhaps we must decide which of the two evils present, ISIS and Assad we want left standing at the end of the day. I think reality with Putin and Iran backing Assad, he isn't going anywhere unless ISIS is successful in overthrowing him. It will not be our 5,000 strong moderate secular Islamic rebels.
There are way too many questions here, way too many bad choices, way too many dictators and tyrants. But it does seem, like it or not, that is whom has to be in charge for that region to remain stable. Kings, dictators, princes, tyrants. I wonder if there is really an answer to all of this.
