Would you vote for bombing ISIS in Syria?

[atomised]

You seem to be entirely convinced of the usefulness of air strike. I would be interested to see the evidence that makes you so certain. I am skeptical as it appears that Danesh still have a huge stronghold in Irag and many refugees are still leaving despite bombing in the region.

And what has former pop idol star Darius Danesh got to.do.with this

 

[BadFish]

It was widely reported that Air Strikes helped slow then halt the ISIS advance on Baghdad while the Iraqi army regrouped.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-29408101

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...es-help-halt-Isil-advance-towards-Kobane.html

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...air-strikes-on-isis-targets-in-iraq-and-syria

On a broader military point it is surely common sense that having total air superiority will restrict and hamper an enemy's ability to wage war.

No one has said ISIS can be defeated by air power but there is little doubt they would hold more land and have made bigger gains if it wasn't there.

http://army.newsdeskmedia.com/british-army-2011/air-power

Cheers i will have a read when i get a moment.

I take your point about air superiority which is indeed common sense. However this suggests that air strikes are part of a wider strategy rather than in isolation, I am not following the politics of this that closely but i haven't seen a great deal of discussion about the place of air strikes within a greater strategy.

 

[AmexRuislip]

Yes

 

[Bold Seagull]

And the ayes have it.....

26 civilians dead, including 7 children, possibly more dead in the rubble.

Bombing eh. History tells us it works...right!?

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/dec/07/syrian-civilians-killed-us-airstrike?CMP=share_btn_fb