Obama decides to use airstrikes to start the destruction of ISIS, but are we seriously killing people involved in ISIS or just innocent people? Apparently we've hit an ISIS bulldozer, two ISIS tanks, another ISIS vehicle and six ISIS attack positions. We've also hit two mortar teams, a large ISIS unit, two smaller ISIS groups, and destroyed three ISIS Humvee's.
But as I sit down and talk to my family about this absurd attacks, we discuss on whether or not ISIS or even Syrian citizens will come and attack us. Is it just inevitable that they are going to hit us? My older sister who goes to school in Queens was told by my dad, a retired NYC police officer, that she had specific steps to follow because her life could be most at risk for my family. She's right by NYC and even though they have hit NYC already what is going to make us think that they won't hit one of the biggest cities in America?
As I know that many of you agree with Obama's airstrike plan, I strongly disagree with it. Yes we know that there are some ISIS units over by where we hit, but is it all of them? No it isn't, so why are we going to destroy a small portion of ISIS along with millions of innocent people? I personally think we would have been better off just not air striking them and continuing the war over their where not as many people would get hurt. I'm tired of fighting and killing people that don't deserve to be killed. It's like say a loved one of yours were to get ill, but a doctor does a surgery or procedure that is risky when he has a safer method of controlling the illness. Why wouldn't the doctor use the safer method first to see if it works before using the risky procedure? It's just like the airstrikes. Why are we using such horrific methods of attack when there are simpler ways?
No comments:
Post a Comment