Bernie Sanders was asked tonight what he thought would be the best way to fight ISIS and whether or not American troops would need to fight as "boots on the ground," and he said what has become his standard answer in every speech, interview, and debate: I refer you to King Abdullah of Jordan (paraphrase).
Sanders, echoing Abdullah, says the war with ISIS is a war for the soul of Islam and that, as such, it should be fought by "Muslim troops." Note he says "Muslim," not Arab or Middle Eastern. Muslim.
It's a fairy tale answer from someone who doesn't know anything about foreign policy.
"It should be fought by Muslims" isn't a war policy. It's not a defense strategy. Heck, if it were a Republican who said it, it wouldn't even be acceptable (he'd be called racist). It's nothing more than a platitude. And while debates are not given to lengthy strategy answers, it shows what a President Bernie would be like as Commander-in-Chief. Unprepared.
He is simply trying to have his cake and eat it too. Yes, I want to fight ISIS. No, I don't want to fight ISIS. Republicans have two main positions on how to fight ISIS, typically characterized as intervention and non-intervention. Bernie's plan couldn't rightly be called either. But it could be called "a thing not to say as President."
Yes, most experts believe that a win in the Middle East against ISIS requires the cooperation of Arab nations. No, going on the world stage as the Commander-in-Chief of the United States military and labeling something as a holy war that you intend to fund and support is not a good, strategic move.