You can never destroy guerrilla groups with air force. If it was possible, U.S would have done it in Iraq or Afghanistan and Israel could have done it in Gaza and Lebanon. Don't hold your hopes high. As long as these groups have local sympathizers, they are going to remain strong.
In countries like Iraq, KSA, Jordan or Syria, even if they have active support of 20,000-30,000 residents, it'll be more than enough. Iraq is a good example. ISIS has local support in some tribes in Sunni areas, the same as Syria.
So, don't you think they'll have supporters in KSA, Jordan or Lebanon or Kuwait? It's a bit naive to think otherwise. They may nit capture big cities or the whole country, but they'll do some serious damage.
I never wrote that this will solve the entire problem if you have read my posts in this thread. I just said that it would have prevented them from getting such a big foothold. Not only a competent air force but also something as simple as UAV's. Wing Loong being one example as there has been talk of Iraq wanting it.
I actually wrote exactly what you are writing now in this post below. I will make some highlights.
@
1000
The Americans already did it in Fallujah during the Second Battle of Fallujah after the first failed attempt. They still struggled a lot and never fixed the problem entirely. So the question to ask oneself here is also whether military action will just be a short-term problem? I think that more important measures and more long-term measures must be approached in Iraq. Measures that have a social, economic and political dimension.
Which I am not going to write an essay about although it is interesting.
Those 20.000-30.000 numbers are WAY to big I am afraid. Most of those that cheered for them are what you call PASSIVE supporters. They are not part of ISIS, they have no military experience, are often youngsters and are just doing what they have always learnt to do. Praise those in power and control.
It does not mean that they love ISIS. In fact 90% of all Sunni Arabs, including all major Arab tribes in those regions of Iraq, do not even support ISIS. They often fight against them. ISIS have killed as many Sunni Arabs if not more as they have killed Shia Arabs.
@
1000 should confirm what I write here.
Of course there is a passive support which facilities their errands. Yet the reasons for that are many. They must be found in the social, economic and most importantly political state of Iraq. To make it short. Maliki has been a retard politically. Done nothing good for Iraq. Only created more problems. Had a more mature and inclusive prime minister ruled the passive support to ISIS would not have even be close to this "big".
Yes, supporters. Mostly among people who already left (in the hundreds) or people who are wanted. Aside from a tiny minority that are deluded and think that ISIS will become the next Caliphate and free Palestine etc.
The only country that I see at somewhat of a REAL risk (all sensationalism put aside) is Jordan. As they are bordering not only the mess in Syria but also Iraq. Not only are they among the most poor countries in the region due to lack of resources but they also host millions upon millions of refugees. Palestinian, Syrian, Iraqi etc.
It's a miracle that Jordan has been this stable for so long actually. Still vulnerable though but I don't think that KSA, the GCC, Egypt, the Arab world in general and the West will allow Jordan to fall. Let alone Israel. Too much of a strategic location.
Al-Qaeda elements already caused sporadic bombing attacks and ambushes in KSA in the 2000's but they were defeated. That is fair to say. So at first only this will happen. But I am yet to see it since the "Arab Spring" started over 3 years ago.
For those deluded retards that think that ISIS will move into KSA and occupy the 13th biggest country in the world and roll into Makkah and Madinah are frankly deluded retards. But let them have those daydreams. No importance as this is just PDF and the internet.
