Obama's strategy is half-hearted and hesitant.
I´m not sure those half efforts in Syria will eventually be able to fulfill the president´s goal. It´s a fine strategy in relation to containing and split the IS. But it´s not a strategy that leads to defeat for the IS. If you want to remove the IS, you have to be totally committed in Syria
Obama said in his speech that the United States will not put ground troops into battle against the IS in Iraq and Syria. Instead, the United States supports moderate local partners on the ground who is already struggling with IS.
But the problem in Syria is, there´s no local partners, it´s fictitious partners, he´s talking about, and in Iraq, the Iraqi army are in dissolution and, therefore, no effective partner now
On the whole, the conflict is near-bottomless, because it is not just about IS. Defeat of the IS is not an impossible goal. The US military and many other armies in the region could quickly eradicate IS. The problem is that the IS is nurtured by and in the midst of the sectarian fault line between Sunnis and Shiites, and if you get involved in this conflict, you will put yourself as a mediator in the 1400 years old struggle between Sunnis and Shiites. The US did that for ten years (during the recent Iraq war.) - Without great success
The extended battle with the IS will be the next chapter in a grueling battle that has kept the United States at war in one form or another since the day 13 years ago when hijacked aircraft crushed America´s sense of security...the fight against the IS will require far more intense American bombing than in Somalia and Yemen