BIRT America should continue to participate in the Military Coalition against ISIS

Sorry it"s taken me so long to get back to you, with the inclement weather weather in my area, my soccer schedule and whatnot. Any who, I"d never abandoned a decent debate regardless. To answer your questions - How could we ensure the protection of humanitarian aid: The answer here is simple but confusing, our only mission would be to ensure that it gets to Europe and the Middle east, since Europe is so close to the middle east it would not only be tactically but finically better for our friends across the pond to deal with it from there, simply put; we get it to the United Nations/Kuwait, they are responsible for the movement of supplies into hostile area and protection on our behalf, it"ll be an "IOU" (this answers two of your questions) How can we ensure the aid will give long term effects in return? This one"s fairly simple, the aid will not only help oppressed civilians, but their own domestic forces, when they"re able to stand on their own they"ll begin to fight for their own land back from the inside regardless of the ISIS control. Furthermore to support point two I just made, surprisingly Russia was onboard fairly quickly in the attacks on ISIS, why would we waste our resources doing something they"re already doing on our behalf? But to strengthen this point I"ll go ahead and provide some quick facts for you. Truth: ISIS works similar to an executive business Truth: ISIS"s biggest income is the sales of Oil from their operations in Saudi Arabia and Turkey Truth: There are sleeper cells in America and a number of other countries Truth: Part of ISIS"s creation is due to America"s own influences So the question you"re probably asking now is what exactly do we do, and you"re probably pondering flaws in what I just states. I"ll try to simplify this and explain the following actions that should take place. It would be finically beneficial to let Russia take front on the offensive campaigns against ISIS, the US could start dealing with humanitarian aid instead of offense. If we really want to do our part we need to start identifying the sleeper cells amongst the US and our Allies, it"s likely that the sleeper cells will not be people of Arabic decent, most likely American ISIS sympathizers. So here"s the breakdown of how our action will work. Retract our forces in the area to focus on domestic defense > start supplying humanitarian aid through our allies in the area > work with the intelligence community globally to start identifying sympathizers > work on education of ISIS to prevent further people sympathizing > attack ISIS from a finical stand point I was surprised with how often you brought up the fact that "ISIS IS GROWING", yeah they"re clearly growing but not domestically, it"s internationally, we"re looking in the complete wrong areas. Furthermore, how can you argue morality with a topic such as this, this isn"t a morality debate. It only becomes morality when US lives are at stake. You said ISIS"s mission statement was to gain superiority through intimidation, last time I checked we weren"t intimidated by them so that"s a lost cause (lol) Quoting Obama probably wasn"t the best idea, seeing as he hasn"t had the best track record. Anyway back to the debate, You could argue that ISIS is a modern day Nazi Germany, and if history repeats itself (which it generally does in some way) one of three things are going to happen ultimately; First Option: Rebellions will break out amongst the people ISIS has control over and they will start their own militias, eventually through the help of the Russian government and other close nations retake the area and leaving ISIS to eventually decay away Second Option: ISIS Could become the next North Korea and be completely forgotten about, who cares about them anyway? Third Option: Eventually they"ll get tired of playing around and either surrender or just disappear slowly http://learning.blogs.nytimes.com... http://www.thefiscaltimes.com... http://www.businessinsider.com... http://www.enotes.com... Due to the unfortunate timing of debate.org's server crash, this is my unorganized rough draft. Since my opponate didn't have time to rebut any of these I'm forced to extend all my contentions. In conclusion, key voting factors are these (in order to be fair) > No contentions dropped, all extend unchallenged > I proved that it would be economically beneficial to not get involved > The job is already being done by Russia > To take down ISIS you need to work executively