While air strikes and heavier formers of military action are crucial in the ongoing fight against ISIS, having troops on the ground is going to prove to be even more crucial. Troops are harder to detect, and can infiltrate the "heart" of ISIS more efficiently than any air strike or mass attack.
ISIS are the barbarians and the United States is Rome. There is no winning a 'war on terror' because the ideas fueling these radicals only proliferate with every attempt to squash them. Since these terrorists can consist of nothing more than pissed off people who wish to fight against American occupation with often antiquated weaponry they are not beholden to the same economic constraints that will inevitably end this American military interventionism if it's not done by choice beforehand.
I don't know how many time our government is going to make the same mistake in the same fight. Fighting ISIS is different as they move around so much and we are not very good at pinpointing them. Beyond that, like with the last war, ISIS uses our attacks as a recruiting tool.
This kind of thing has been going on for thousand of years. Throughout history there have been wars in the name of religion that have flattened cities, decimated societies and resulted in loss of life and property. This is nothing new. I feel badly for those people, but it's not up to the U.S. to jump into every one's problems. If we have a problem with ISIS, we should keep our men here, so if they come to our country we have enough fighters here to defeat them.
I'm sorry if I sound selfish but no, I do not believe our country should endanger and sacrifice the lives of our troops by sending them to Iraq and Syria where we may or may not defeat ISIS. Let's act only if and when we have no other alternative here.