An excellent article in today's SMH on Australia's new involvement in Iraq by James Brown. Brown is the Military Fellow at the Lowy Institute for International Policy. If those from the right like SM would care to read this analysis then comment rather than blindly following Abbott with his gung ho approach.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/australian-forces-could-face-heavy-burden-in-iraq-20140914-10gufa.html

Dear Paul,

Thanks for the link - however,
I don't think it will change a thing.
Australia has already been committed
to this involvement - and who knows
where it will end. Perhaps with a
change of government in this country
things may come to a close quicker.
But again, that's a gamble. The Opposition
is supporting the PM in this matter.

Foxy, I do not think Labor's support is of much consequence, Even with the big two's backing public opinion is divided at about 55/45 in favor at the moment. The ABC 'World Today Program' had good coverage. Where is Abbott's exit strategy, he cannot demonstrate any clear objectives, the whole exercise is fraught with dangers for Australia without defined gains. The situation with other countries such as Turkey is unclear and the loyalty of the Iraqi military is highly questionable at best. There is a lot more to this than a simple ISIL is bad (which it is), so lets go get em'.

http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2014/s4087631.htm

For those that are capable of reading:

ISIL rise to power has 3 underpinning factors:
1 The sectarian nature of the Syrian and Iraqi governments has left the Sunnis feeling victimized and preferring the Sunni ISIL over the Shiite Iraqi army.
2 The war in Syria and the disorganized nature of the Iraqi army has enabled ISIL to gather a quantity of armored vehicles and capture land using rapid deployment techniques.
3 The areas captured have ISIL a significant stream of money to buy arms.

The thrusts of the Allied approach is:

1 An air war only, (no boots on the ground similar to Libya), which destroyed the vastly superior army of Qaddafi even in his home territory.
2 Strengthening opposing militia such as the the Kurds and the Iraqi army,
3 Creating an Iraqi government that is inclusive of Sunnis as a political alternative to ISIL.

No one believes that ISIL can hold onto its territory with no mobility and no heavy weapons.

SM,

"3 Creating an Iraqi government that is inclusive of Sunnis as a political alternative to ISIL."

Yes!

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/14/opinion/sunday/thomas-l-friedman-obamas-strategy-for-fighting-isis-isnt-all-about-us.html

"President Obama clearly took this decision to lead the coalition to degrade and destroy the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, or ISIS, with deep ambivalence. How could he not? Our staying power is ambiguous, our enemy is barbarous, our regional allies are duplicitous, our European allies are feckless and the Iraqis and Syrians we’re trying to help are fractious. There is not a straight shooter in the bunch."

"Before we step up the bombing campaign on ISIS, it needs to be absolutely clear on whose behalf we are fighting. ISIS did not emerge by accident and from nowhere. It is the hate-child of two civil wars in which the Sunni Muslims have been crushed. One is the vicious civil war in Syria in which the Iranian-backed Alawite-Shiite regime has killed roughly 200,000 people, many of them Sunni Muslims, with chemical weapons and barrel bombs. And the other is the Iraqi civil war in which the Iranian-backed Shiite government of Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki systematically stripped the Sunnis of Iraq of their power and resources.

There will be no self-sustained stability unless those civil wars are ended and a foundation is laid for decent governance and citizenship. Only Arabs and Muslims can do that by ending their sectarian wars and tribal feuds. We keep telling ourselves that the problem is “training,” when the real problem is governance. We spent billions of dollars training Iraqi soldiers who ran away from ISIS’s path — not because they didn’t have proper training, but because they knew that their officers were corrupt hacks who were not appointed on merit and that the filthy Maliki government was unworthy of fighting for. We so underestimate how starved Arabs are, in all these awakenings, for clean, decent governance."

Incredibly tangled web of enmities and allegiances in the Middle-East.

P,

I don't disagree with your post at all.

What I do disagree with is some of the more looney assertions from the left.

While ISIL cannot be defeated from the air, it is possible to degrade their capability to the point where the Kurdish and Iraqi military can take over.