As America’s role in the ISIS crisis takes shape under the command of President Barack Obama, it is useful to examine carefully its implications and how PR has been handled.

It helps to compare this effort with how George W. Bush worked his way up to the Iraqi invasion.

This time there are even broader implications, given the changed politics that have brought Obama into such close relationships with Arab countries and the conundrum created by Speaker John Boehner and Majority Leader Mitch McConnell in doing an end run inviting Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu to address Congress without the usual involvement of the President as a matter of courtesy and formality.

The ISIS terrorists ironically have helped the President by their horrific array of beheadings of captives and other actions that could not be ignored on the international level. But his approaches also have raised questions.

Given that Americans were not only worn down by two long wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, they have became doubtful and if not fearful of anything that would send our men and women once more into combat, not to mention the potential billions if not trillions that it could all cost.

To organize the effort, Obama decided on enlisting what he called “coalition” partners among nations threatened by the ISIS actions, neighbors to places where the roving bands of warriors are attacking, seemingly with enough success to call for fast international coordinated action.

To gain support publicly, he recruited retired Marine Corps General John R. Allen, a well-decorated officer with 38 years of service.

Allen, who had refused the top NATO spot, has been traveling as the President’s spokesperson, appearing fairly frequently on all television networks and being interviewed for print media.

His role appears to be not only to lend credibility to the campaign but also to oversee rebuilding of Iraq armed forces where ISIS is attacking with some success and threatening more.

While the idea of “coalitions” would seem not only to reduce America’s load in the campaign by spreading the responsibility among friendly nations, Americans don’t really know what has been promised to gain these enlistees.

More than that, Americans don’t know what was offered to other countries once the expected anti-ISIS campaign is hopefully and successfully completed, which Obama has estimated to be at least three years.

The media have begun to ask the President questions about the cost of the effort in both dollars and blood, and why haven't the countries most directly affected by the contributed much more?

There are also questions about the war's impact on Israel, America's most trusted ally in the region.

It is significant that a CNN poll indicated an overwhelming public demand for the President to act strongly while many assert he is not acting strongly enough.

Having indicated he would ask Congress for backing of war powers for him, it would seem he can act and soon…with virtually no one from the media or elsewhere even asking the questions previously noted until it may be too late.

In the end, the President will get the political and PR backing he wants, and the US will go back to war.

America must take charge of defeating ISIS. Its role as leader of the free world is at stake.

* * *

Joe Honick is president of GMA International in Bainbridge Island, Wash.