4 Responses

  1. avatar
    The Hooded Claw at |

    Il limite della strategia per contrastare l'Isis é che non che non c'è una strategia per contrastare l'Isis.

    Reply
    1. avatar
      Silendo at |

      Ecco…

      Reply
  2. avatar
    Silendo at |

    Il punto di vista di Ian Bremmer:

    […] But given the political constraints and the general unwillingness of partner nations, it might be the best workable strategy. According to a recent Pew Research Center 
    Bremmer is skeptical the strategy as it stands will accomplish the mission of "degrading and ultimately destroying" ISIS. But he argues there isn't a strategy out there that's both realistic and a better option at this point. The danger, of course, is that by the time Syrian rebels are vetted and trained by late 2015 at the earliest, they may not have much territory to defend.
    I think the overall US strategy on ISIS is sensible — given the domestic political constraints (a key caveat)," Bremmer said. "Support for US boots on the ground is limited and would quickly grow into opposition over time and given casualties. And if you’re not planning on an actual substantial ground force, you’re left with a strategy that’s part pushback (where you have workable ground forces — for now, the Kurds in Iraq), part containment (west Iraq and Syria). 
    So if you’re asking is [the] present Obama strategy going to defeat ISIS — the answer is no. If you’re asking is there realistically a better, more workable strategy out there — the answer is also no."

    Reply
  3. avatar
    XXL at |

    La strategia per contrastare l'ISIS passerebbe per un robusto regime change in Arabia Saudita. Ma sembra che questa opzione non sia nei programmi.

    Purtroppo.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Immagine CAPTCHA

(obbligatorio)