If you turned the news on for even 10 minutes in the past month, you’re bound to have heard about the ISIS terrorist situation.
ISIS stands for the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. It is a terrorist group looking to set up an Islamic State in certain regions of the Middle-East.

So far, ISIS has taken control of numerous towns along the Syrian-Iraq border and the city of Mosul, the third largest city in Iraq.

They have set up institutions based on strict Sharia law and governed areas under their control already.

They voice their actions through media sources, such as YouTube, where they post videos of mass executions against captured

Syrian soldiers and other religious groups besides Sunni Muslims.

One video in particular that was posted by ISIS showed American journalist James Foley beheaded on camera by an ISIS terrorist after being held prisoner.

American journalist Steven Sotloff also was killed on camera by the ISIS rebels after being kidnapped by them last year. The hooded killer standing next to Sotloff warned the president directly that if U.S. air strikes continue, more Americans will be slain.

It is clear that they want to send a powerful message.

But is ISIS really a serious direct threat to the United States? The media sure thinks so, but I’m still skeptical.

It shouldn’t impress anyone that a group of rebels, with advanced military equipment which they barely know how to use, steam-rolled through a handful of towns because no one was even fighting them.

However, I should not under-estimate the ISIS terrorists. I do believe they pose a potential future threat and I do believe they should be taken seriously and confronted.

A recent poll conducted by the Huffington Post shows that two-thirds of Americans agree with launching air strikes on the ISIS rebels in Syria, which is what the U.S. already has on its agenda.

Another poll they conducted weeks later says that 56 percent of Americans oppose sending in ground troops to Syria, while 20 percent want boots on the ground.

The Obama administration should do what the polls say.

The administration so far has decided on a four-part plan that would take several years to destroy ISIS.  It includes a series of air strikes, training the Iraqi Army, cutting funding and providing a humanitarian effort to those in need.

The biggest threat ISIS poses on our country directly would come from the inside of our own borders.

If a number of media outlets want to suggest that ISIS is as threatening as they report, and that many of us are blind to this threat, then we should handle the situation seriously.

This means spending most of our resources here, not over there, in protecting our borders and raising the level of security against those within our borders.

During wartime, America has always had a closed door policy on immigration and travel into the country.

Now, we could potentially categorize this as a conflict situation, meaning imposing strict regulations and restrictions on visa applications and incoming flights from the people of Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and other areas in conflict with the U.S.

Background checks and constant surveillance on suspicious Americans and foreigners living in America is also necessary.

Cracking down on the people who have affiliations or ties to the conflict should be investigated, especially after recent news of many Americans leaving to go fight for the ISIS rebels.

There is no reason at this time to send troops or invest personnel in ISIS’ backyard, but rather strengthen our homeland and prepare for any threats on American soil.

ISIS is a threat, but a group of rebels killing people across the world does not directly affect us. Their power is limited, and our approach should be to protect ourselves in case there is ever a point where the people of this nation are in imminent danger.