The United States should go on the "attack" against ISIS

There is some confusion in the comments that I would like to clear up to start off my opening argument. Should VS Will There is a huge difference between the US making a decision to go on the offensive against ISIS and the conclusion that they actually will. A few comments suggest that the US never will go on the attack and most likely they won't in my opinion, but that doesn't change fact that they should. Yes, the US most likely will not, but no, that is not what they should do. And that is what I'm arguing, look at the title of the debate, "The United States Should" this doesn't mean that they will, but they should. An Offensive Strategy So, what exactly do I mean by the US' offensive strategy. When I talk about offensive I certainly don't mean an official decleration of war, that would be absurd considering this is simply a group. not a country. My idea of an offense is the idea of US presence and monitor in ISIS claimed terrority, in allied nations with their consent, and even on our soil. Once, again, this is not an all out war on ISIS, just a progressive approach to an inevitable conflict. Inevitable Conflict, and avoiding the avoidableIt is no secret the US is a target for ISIS. Just yesterday Al Shabaab of ISIS called for an attack on the Mall Of America in Minnesota (1). ISIS is a direct threat to America, (2) and who knows what they are capable of producing. The problem with ISIS is that they are not confined in one region, they are mobile and have "pockets" around the globe. The fact of the matter is that ISIS influence and informants could be here in America, the influence of ISIS is near impossible to stop but we can hunt down and stop any ISIS soldiers or informants in America, which I think would be progressive and beneficial to public safety, if we go on the offensive. We cannot sit back and wait for a MOA bombing, in my opinion it would be much safer to avoid the avoidable. Nobody is stopping us from persuing and watching over possible ISIS members that are living here in our homeland, but if we take on defensive approach we are inviting pressure and possible terrorist attacks on our nation. Monitoring of ISIS Teritory and Allied NationsISIS is hunting down people all over the world and publically slaughtering them on film. Yes, including Americans. I think that once ISIS has started killing US Citizens, then they become not only a threat to national security, but also an enemy of our country. Yes Americans die in foreign nations often, but not by terrorist groups who video it and then mock our country by killing our people. ISIS has become an enemy to the US and a defensive approach is inviting more gruesome online beheadings of our people. The US would receive great benefits by mobilizing in to regions of ISIS control, not necessarily by moving in an army, but by using technology and other forms of intelligence gathering to know more about this group. If we know more about them, we then have a stronger defense, because we can predict what ISIS may do next. If we link up with allied nations, we can have the same benefits in a way. ISIS have claimed attacks on nations like France and England, and if we go to those nations to provide support we may also learn more about the attacks, and then learn more about ISIS' attacks and better prepare ourselves for a possible attack on our soil. (3)ConclusionISIS is a national threat. They have killed Americans, threatened America, and an attack on our soil is hanging over our heads. If we go on the attack and monitor incoming possible ISIS members in to America, go monitor their claimed territory, work with nations already attacked, we can go on the progressive front and move towards either stopping an attack completely, or better preparing ourselves for one. A defensive approach where we sit back and wait for an ISIS attack is dangerous to our citizens. We need to actively persue and hunt out possible attacks before it's too late. Once again, this is not a call to war, rather a call to action to go on the offense against someone who is going on the attack against us. Thanks to everyone for reading and I look forward to hearing from my opponent. (1). http://www.foxnews.com...(2) . http://www.cnn.com...(3) . http://www.theatlantic.com...