Here we go
“The president should come up with a strategy, present it to Congress, address the American people and tell us how he believes we should stop them,” McConnell said on the Fox Business Network. “This is not in my view a manageable situation. They want to kill us.”
Sadly, I think Sam Stein is right in this piece about the ever narrowing debate on this. The consensus has formed. Coalition building, Syria involvement, air-strikes, special forces --- and inevitable mission creep. Let's freak out about how "people are trying to kill us omygod!" an leave the bigger questions for another day:
McConnell said ISIS probably poses a greater national security threat than al Qaeda did in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks.
"It seems unlikely that U.S. military action, even if assisted by surrogates on the ground, can 'kill' ISIS. At best, we will be able to significantly reduce its capabilities. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, but then what?" said Andrew Bacevich, a professor at Boston University who was an outspoken critic of the Iraq war. "If the basic problem is instability -- a problem extending far beyond Iraq/Syria, of course -- then the big question is what if anything the U.S. and its allies can do to restore stability to the region. That’s where the debate ought to focus. I don’t get much sense of people taking on that issue, perhaps because it is truly a daunting one."
So far, Obama seems to understand that. But at this point there's really no room for that discussion. Hysteria is building. The hawks sense that there's action afoot. The Republicans are aroused at the prospect that this could change the dynamic in 2016. The Democrats are freaking out that someone might call them wimps.
The warship is sailing out of the harbor and once again we're all just standing here on the shore screaming into the wind.