Intervention must stay off ground against ISIS

Within the last couple of months, atrocities have been committed by the terrorist group the Islamic State (IS), previously known as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). This radical group is trying to establish their own version of a purportedly Islamic state by ignoring everything inherently Islamic.
Currently, the group has taken by force or has a major presence in both the northeast of Syria and the northern of Iraq, including Sinjar, Mosul and part of Irbil. The terrorist group has taken hostages and publicly beheaded American journalists James Foley and Steven Sotloff, while the threatening the U.S., as reported by CNN.
According to ISIS, these beheadings were a method to avert U.S. airstrikes on its operations in Iraq, which have been on going since August. With ISIS brutality mounting, the Obama administration had been debating how to better combat the threat with either continued air strikes or the deployment of ground troops. On Monday night, the U.S. started air strikes against ISIS in Syria.
While I agree that this terrorist group needs to be stopped, the United States should not embroil itself in another long-standing conflict in the Middle East. The U.S. needs to follow in the steps of allies such as France, which has joined against ISIS through precise air strikes of ISIS held Iraqi territory, as reported by The Independent. The current level of air strikes should be maintained without deploying more ground troops.
Deploying ground troops would risk something called “mission creep”, a shifting of goals throughout the course of a military campaign leading to prolonged commitment. The tendency for this sort of mission creep is further intensified when you realize the abstract goal of such a military strategy: to defeat a rather widespread and shifting terrorist group.
This is almost exactly what happened with the “War on Terror”. With the absurd and intangible goal of defeating terrorism, when do you know that the mission is over? When is terrorism actually “defeated”?
Unfortunately, former U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates openly voiced skepticism, as reported in The Guardian, on the success of relying solely on Iraqi ground forces to defeat ISIS. He was quoted as saying that in order to be successful, there will need a presence on the ground. I cannot fathom how the continued campaign against ISIS by the United States will not result in some form of ground troop deployment and sprawled military operation.
While ISIS has threatened the United States and harmed American citizens, ground troop deployment is something that will only further the loss of American lives. As such, the Obama administration needs to maintain a targeted and precise response through air strikes.