To those who advocate a more indiscriminate killing as a tactic, what's your overall strategy? So far, I haven't heard anything promising.
The situation, as I understand it, is the Syrian civil war, with essentially three groups: Assad, ISIS, and a smaller rebel army. Assad has been a murderous, secular dictator that most Syrians want gone, but he is propped up by Russia and Iran. ISIS is supported by wealthy Wahabists, mostly from Saudi Arabia. The US have been supporting the revel army, mostly to keep either of the other parties from winning and to avoid a power vacuum when Assad falls, which everyone assumed would happen sooner. Unfortunately the revel army has little support in the population, and beefing them up pretty much failed.
Up to now, the US wouldn't support Assad against ISIS, because Assad is wholly in the pocket of the Russians and Iranians, and the last thing we need is a state controlled by those nations next to Israel and Turkey. And the Russians have mostly bombed the rebel army on Assad's behalf, presumably to keep US influence out, and pretty much succeeded with that. Now ISIS made a strategic blunder with attacking the Russian jetliner, and they're now on the receiving end from Russia as well. So they decided to up the ante and go after France, and the West in general. Which won't end well, and with our without more US involvement will soon lead to Assad winning, and ISIS being pushed back mostly underground, but no less lethal. And pretty much no matter what the US does short of a long-term occupation of Syria, we will get what we don't want, that is a Syria that's controlled by Russia and Iran, and an underground terror organization funded by Saudi oil wealth.
So does anyone have a better strategy? Just mindless killing out of frustration doesn't count.