Since it first received global recognition in 2011, ISIS has left a trail of blood and destruction in its wake. Controlling more than 50% of Syria, and posing a threat to surrounding countries, ISIS has become a world crisis, but is the intervention of the United States the best course of action to take?
The death toll brought by ISIS is estimated to be around a gruesome 230,000 people, according to the Carter Center, and if the United States were to intervene, those numbers would drastically increase.
ISIS survives on its propaganda efforts, and since any strikes on ISIS made by the United States military will inevitably kill innocent civilians, United States intervention may do contribute to the propaganda efforts by ISIS.
Some believe that as a part of the global community it is the United States’ responsibility to stop the terrorist group before it becomes an uncontrollable international issue. ISIS lacks many resources, therefore, it is inevitable that they will fall.
According to a study by IHS Jane’s, the territory controlled by ISIS has gone down by 9.4% in the first half of 2015.
Freshman Tibet Ergül believes: “United States intervention is fruitless, and a repeat of past mistakes. Since ISIS’s power is diminishing, there is no point in risking the lives of our own men and women.”
War is usually a costly calamity, in terms of finance and military personnel.
James Corbett, a teacher at Corona del Mar (CDM), believes that the United States should not intervene, because “we have our own problems here in the United States, that affects us more directly. Instead of investing millions of dollars in a faraway country, we should start by resolving issues here in the United States.”
ISIS is a major threat, and with the amount of attention it has gotten, several countries have invested their efforts to combat the issue. Among those countries is Russia, and with Russia’s military involvement, the interference of the United States military will cause further controversy and tension.
Joshua Flores, a freshman at CDM with an interest in politics said “in a time of great tragedy, our top priority should be providing food, shelter and refuge for those who have been forced out of their countries because of ISIS. Our priority should not be risking the lives of military personnel by sending them to combat ISIS.”
According to a poll by Campaign for Liberty, the American people are against taking action in Syria; only nine percent of poll takers believe military intervention by the United States is necessary to eradicate ISIS.
Haya Al-Halabi, a Syrian teenager said “as a Syrian, I am aware how bad things are in Syria; however, another tragedy does not make the first tragedy any better. I believe that the United States should intervene, but not by bombing Syria, as that will have negative consequences. The United States can help out by offering resources such as food and water, and by sending military strategists to help support the combat against ISIS.”
An Arab Union official emphasized that “people will continue to die as long as military conflict persists. The only way to ensure an end to the loss of lives is to stop military confrontations and resort to peaceful and political negotiations to end the conflict.”
He also said that “although tension between countries has been rising, the fight against ISIS is part of the International campaign to combat terrorism worldwide, therefore, any effort by any country in any non-aggressive regards will be a welcomed one.”
The United States and other countries should offer their support, by providing resources such as food and water, as well as coming together and agreeing upon a collaborated solution.
As Flores stated, “The reality is that in these fragile times, United States’ aggressive intervention is not welcomed, by the Middle East, nor is it necessary.”