Think about it for a second. ISIS, IS, Taliban, Daesh are not your traditional terrorist organization. I'm against the bombing of Syria for this reason. I'll explain in a second, my rationale, so let me throw some background.
A terrorist is someone who uses fear, guerilla tactics and bombs directly to accomplish a goal in a situation that often includes civil war. Activities are normally limited to one country or a region, since the terrorist accomplishes little by travelling far from home. And there is the key, the ISIS goals are not to resolve civil war, but rather - to create it. Starting with the Arab spring as the source of civil unrest, the IS militants just drop in to further destabilize. A bit like mercenaries, who pop up wherever regular forces are not making progress at the time. It's a low cost operation with lots of bang for your buck (literally) and that's the other key - funding.
IS funding is a completely separate blog post I think, I'll continue instead. So when we rush in and bomb IS in order to stop them killing off more groups like the Yazidis, we just give them a platform. They are a lot more organised than we think and although we stop them from killing innocents through a bombing campaign, we don't really fix the problem. It's laudable to stop the killing of innicents, do not get me wrong. But terrorists are normally not lawfull. Two rights do not make a wrong in their books.
Bombings cut supply lines, sure, but they also cause people, civilians to leave the area. We call them refugees, IS cell members are able to secretly mingle with these refugees and travel more freely than normally as a result. Where do they go? Oh, I'm sure they know, and David Cameron knows where they want to go, or does he? Well there you have it, bombing just pisses people off, it might save lives, but it plays into their hands... something we keep on doing it seems.
