President Barrack Obama has been called weak and indecisive through out his presidency. When he decided to allow Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to hand over his biological weapons to the Russians he was slammed by conservatives for "leading from behind" and not continuing America's role at the head of all foreign affairs. When he pulled the United States military out of Iraq, as the American people wanted, the right wing cried murder. Now Obama wants to show that he's a big, tough, macho president who isn't afraid to go stumbling into a bloody conflict. The problem here is that there is no thinkable way that the US will be able to quash the Islamic State by force. Insurgencies cannot be defeated by foreign powers. France vs. Vietnam (1950's), insurgent victory. US vs. Vietnam (1960's-70's), insurgent victory. Russia vs. Afghanistan (1980's), insurgent victory. The United States should know well that the guerrilla forces always win, they defeated the British to gain independence not by defeating the British army but by waiting until public opinion turned against war. The only way to defeat ISIS is to allow them to rule over their lands and show the people that they are not the best leaders. If they lop enough heads off and take enough freedoms away moderate Muslim groups will rise up to depose radical rule. If we bomb the people of Iraq they will only be drawn to radical groups who promise retribution against the US for the murder of innocent civilians. President Obama should take a diplomatic approach and stay out of this mess.