Even the top Democrats are criticizing Obama for doing nothing about ISIS or ISIS or whatever they are calling themselves. The British Prime Minister David Cameron gave a much better leadership speech on the subject while Obama stated that "we have no plan".

What should we do?

I can say only one thing -Terrorism cant be suppressed with terrorism.
There is always ways to talk, negotiate and settle issues.
US has fund and power to go for war all over the world. but that a'int gonna solve terrorism perpetually.
Of course, eradicating terrorism was not the primary agenda for US in all the instances. It was just an eye washer to the public.

you mean,you beg those that are hellbent to kill you,to please NOT to kill you?

First things first.
Find out where, and more specifically, WHO is funding them.
Cut off their resources.
Then kill them.

Morning Joe!...The real question is, "how do you wage war on the Islamic State?...More aggression in Iraq and Syria too soon is only going to cost more lives...I seldom agree with Kerry, but he is right when he says terrorism is a world problem...Once again and as usual, Obama "miss spoke" when he said we have no plan...What he meant and failed to convey is we have no plan for immediate action...We have a basic strategy in place that includes air power, ground alliances, special ops and equipping Iraq and Syria...This sends a clear message that we are ready and we can deliver...Obama might be taking a "too cautious" role, but his hesitancy does seem to be blurring party lines...Both sides are beginning to agree we must do something...and coming together as a nation IS and ALWAYS has been the first and MOST IMPORTANT step we AMERICANS take before deciding to wage war against anyone...

We have the technology, resources and intelligence to nearly wipe ISIS out in a month's time. If we ever "took our gloves off", which I add, hasn't been done in generations, the threat would be eliminated very quickly.

I am not saying this is the avenue we use to deal with ISIS, but the only way to deal with extremists such as these is to make the fight not worth it.

Its cold, yes. But that is the only method that consistently works.

.....and have every Bleeding Heart in the World howling Warcrimes at the top of their Voices!

This is so wrong on so many levels, I don't even know where to begin?....wow

Churchill might have been right on the Button,addressing this strategy, when he said: "An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last."!

He indeed was correct. I believe we started to fuel ISIS when we released several prisoners in response to their releasing Bowe a while back.

Europe's policy is to pay ransom money for hostages which results in these organizations collecting 60(ish)% of their funding from kidnapping. Wonder why they still do it?

Why do you think they killed our reporter? They knew America wouldn't pay up and wanted to "send the world a message". We should have sent a message right back IMO.

ISIS was "being fueled" long before you were born....

Meanwhile, back in this universe ...

I think countries such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar have been funding the most radical branches of Islam from their vast oil wealth from day one.

As mentioned above, the problem will not go away till the funding stops. I also think the funding has been supplemented worldwide by the less radical factions.

It only takes one generation to create a hate-focused group if taught from an impressionable age. The Saudis have spread their version of Wahhabism almost everywhere. Since they are considered "friends" of the US, I don't see that changing. David Cameron is trying to address that part of the problem by outlawing "hate preachers". I don't see how that can work in the US. The virus is spreading.

I don't see how a standard military operation can work either. The fighters just throw down their weapons and blend into the population when faced with a losing battle. Then they pop up later when someone rearms them.

The following article titled "How Saudi Arabia helped ISIS take over the North of Iraq" sheds a lot of light on the above problem. It makes most of the ISIS problem out to be a well funded (by Saudi), well coordinated war of the Sunnis against the Shia. A quote from the article is as follows ...

" Some time before 9/11, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, once the powerful Saudi ambassador in Washington and head of Saudi intelligence until a few months ago, had a revealing and ominous conversation with the head of the British Secret Intelligence Service, MI6, Sir Richard Dearlove. Prince Bandar told him: "The time is not far off in the Middle East, Richard, when it will be literally 'God help the Shia'. More than a billion Sunnis have simply had enough of them."

The fatal moment predicted by Prince Bandar may now have come for many Shia, with Saudi Arabia playing an important role in bringing it about by supporting the anti-Shia jihad in Iraq and Syria.

Since the capture of Mosul by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isis) on 10 June, Shia women and children have been killed in villages south of Kirkuk, and Shia air force cadets machine-gunned and buried in mass graves near Tikrit.

In Mosul, Shia shrines and mosques have been blown up, and in the nearby Shia Turkoman city of Tal Afar 4,000 houses have been taken over by Isis fighters as "spoils of war"...."

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/opinion/how-saudi-arabia-helped-isis-take-over-the-north-of-iraq-30435038.html

David Cameron might be good at leadership speeches , but that's about it. Just like american politician, he works for big money and doesn't care about the interests of his people.

The US is creating, training and funding extremists like ISIS, cause it's serving their goals, to perpetuate their military-industrial complex, conquer resources, and distract their citizens' attention from the real problems at home.

Extremism has no place in this world , but fighting them you only create more enemies and bring the fighting to your own soil. Plus it's never about democracy, it's all about oil. US should for once respect sovereignty of other countries and let them sort it themselves

yep,better roll over and get a Haircut all the way down to your Neck!
Are you Guys for Real?

would it be possible for you to back up your assertion,that the US is training and financing ISIS and similar Groups,with a bit of concrete proof?

BTW,WHAT Oil?

We didn't get any Kuwaiti oil.
We didn't get any Libyan oil.
We didn't get any Iraqi oil.
Maybe we should attack Mexico?

Perhaps I should have used the term "encouraged". Trust me, I know ISIS was being "fueled" for a long time. I suppose my point was more about kidnapping being a huge source of funding/leverage for organisations such as these. Which is why the U.S. SUPPOSEDLY adopted the policy to "never negotiate with terrorists".

http://timedotcom.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/john-kerry-vitali-klitschko-ukraine.jpg?w=1100

one of your bastards with nazis that are shelling residential areas with heavy artillery.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-iMZZH1QahvY/UaIkEqfT_NI/AAAAAAAA4yw/Z4KjTa6JPjc/s200/zbigniew+brzezinski+with+Osama+bin+Laden.jpg

another example.

I don't understand the haircut reference, being funny doesn't mean that you are right. We'll see how it plays out, but just think about it for a while when you wake up one day and realize you gave away all your freedoms because you had to fight some terror

And your point is taken, but why do you put the emphasis on supposedly?...James Foley was a "freelance" videographer who knew the risks involved when he "returned" to the ME...The choice to do so was his and his alone...After the beheading of Daniel Pearl in 2002, terrorist kidnapping for ransom ballooned BECAUSE other governments were willing to pay huge ransoms...The U.S. is right to refuse...Also, I think it is only fair to mention the amount of ransom that was demanded for Foley's life...It was $132 million, an amount that exceeded by $7 million the five year total paid by other European countries!...Clearly if the U.S. succumbs, there will be no end to the amount of money or the size of the list of demands terrorist will require in exchange for a life...Right now, the best tactic for ensuring safety is to make it clear there is no monetary gain involved in "kidnap for ransom"...

Whom are you calling Bastards,Sunshine?

....and you haven't answered my Oil-question either!