How should US deal with ISIS?

Another American hostage is beheaded by ISIS, or the Islamic State, or ISIL, or whatever the mad-dog Muslim terrorist organization is calling itself today.

As he did in the previous video of journalist James Foley's murder, a masked killer dubbed "Jihadi John" makes his speech — blaming the United States for assorted crimes, laying the death of journalist Steven Sotloff at President Obama's feet and demanding the U.S. stop bombing ISIS in Iraq — then beheads Sotloff.

Once again, the civilized world is aghast at such barbaric behavior, just the latest in a long line of barbarous atrocities committed by ISIS. These include mass murders, torture, mutilation and the desecration and destruction of historic sites, all in the name of its twisted interpretation of Islam. These are fanatics who have gone off the scale to spread Islam by the sword and destroy all who oppose them or refuse to convert. And even conversion provides no assurances against their bloody hands.

It's not just America they hate, it's anyone who opposes them or will not adhere to their "faith." America, acting as the world's policeman and trying to spread our form of democracy whether it's wanted or not, is just their biggest target.

Remember, these are the people who were too radical for al-Qaeda.We're left in a quandary. There's no negotiating with fanatics, and if we're going to deal with ISIS we'll have to use force. Yet the more force we use, the more recruits we drive into their arms. It's what happened with our unnecessary incursion into Iraq, and we're seeing similar effects from our prolonged occupation of Afghanistan. Sure, we initially derailed al-Quaeda in Iraq and Afghanistan, but in the aftermath Muslims angered by America drifted into the influence of ISIS and bought into its fanaticism.

So, do we continue bombing the daylights out of ISIS — which apparently has some success or they wouldn't be demanding we stop — and risk further retaliation plus an increasing risk of sending American ground troops back into Iraq as well as driving more recruits to ISIS?

Or, do we stop actions against ISIS and risk its continued spread in the Islamic world?

That's really a poor choice, but at the moment they seem to be the only alternatives. Negotiations are out of the question since they're not out for peace; they want to conquer and convert.

Over and over we hear that at its heart Islam is a religion of peace, and followers of al-Qaeda and ISIS are just fanatical fundamentalists who aren't representative of Islam. It's like making the Westboro Baptist Church representative of all American Christians.

But, where is the Islamic majority? Why aren't they speaking out against such a vicious minority of their faith? Why aren't they standing up to these defilers of a peaceful religion? Why aren't Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, even Iran and all the other Islamic nations in that corner of the world taking a stand against ISIS? Where is their military coalition to stop these fanatics' crusade?

Surely they realize ISIS — declaring itself a caliphate in Iraq and Syria, the equivalent calling itself the supreme ruler and keeper of the faith — ultimately will march against them to purify those nations of heretics and infidels. They may be safe for now, but the day will come when they will find ISIS on their doorsteps.

Meanwhile, what does the United States do? What should the United States do?