IS strikes: Not America's fight alone - Obama

[webfact]

IS strikes: Not America's fight alone - Obama

WASHINGTON: -- President Obama has hailed the support of Arab nations in air strikes on Islamic State (IS) militants, saying: "This is not America's fight alone."

He was speaking hours after the US and Arab allies launched their first air strikes against IS in Syria.

Activists say at least 70 IS militants and 50 other al-Qaeda-linked fighters were killed in the strikes.

US state department spokeswoman Jan Psaki said the US had warned Syria in advance "not to engage US aircraft".

But she added that Washington had not requested permission or given advance notice of the timing of the attacks.

Full story: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-29333348

-- BBC 2014-09-24

[pkspeaker]

meanwhile IS militants just overran another iraqi army base about 70km away from baghdad, killing or capturing upto 1000.. all the media is reporting this big airstrike success and the fact that the F-22 "had been used in combat for the first time in Syria" after cost $67 billion, it goes into a desolate part of Syria and launches an airstrike against sparsely deployed AK-47 toting irregular army militants-something an old F-15 could have done just as well, or an F-16 or A-6 even cheaper.

When these same militants took over Iraqi cities like Falluja and Ramadi during the American occupation, it took thousands of US marines and army to dislodge them.. and another US invasion of 100,000s of troops is out of the question.. so what is the point of these airstrikes.. if you bomb the IS you help the Iranian backed militia's and Assad's Syrian Army, if you bomb Iranian backed militants and Assad's Army then you help IS..

I can't understand where this military operation is going or for what purpose it could serve, other than to be expensive.

Edited September 24, 2014 by pkspeaker

[pkspeaker]

..and a 'US backed rebel group-that has received weapons from the US' has criticized the airstrikes against IS because they want Assad's army bombed instead--this is proof that these so called 'moderate' rebels don't actually exist, they hold NO contiguous territory, they fight along side the IS or Nusra front (if they don't the IS wastes them in some heinous manner) and then they receive sophisticated US weaponry from the US or from Qatar or Turkey. So the US is arming the side of the war that they are bombing.

[kamahele]

I was flabbergasted that Saudi Arabia, the country whose official version of Islam fuels these fanatics is actually taking part. They must be really afraid of losing the throne to these monsters.

[rickirs]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

meanwhile IS militants just overran another iraqi army base about 70km away from baghdad, killing or capturing upto 1000.. all the media is reporting this big airstrike success and the fact that the F-22 "had been used in combat for the first time in Syria" after cost $67 billion, it goes into a desolate part of Syria and launches an airstrike against sparsely deployed AK-47 toting irregular army militants-something an old F-15 could have done just as well, or an F-16 or A-6 even cheaper.

When these same militants took over Iraqi cities like Falluja and Ramadi during the American occupation, it took thousands of US marines and army to dislodge them.. and another US invasion of 100,000s of troops is out of the question.. so what is the point of these airstrikes.. if you bomb the IS you help the Iranian backed militia's and Assad's Syrian Army, if you bomb Iranian backed militants and Assad's Army then you help IS..

I can't understand where this military operation is going or for what purpose it could serve, other than to be expensive.

First, older carrier strike aircraft are not on the current carriers. Bringing the carriers 10,000 miles back to the US to put older aircraft on the ships is not only a costly waste but you then endanger the security of the carrier battle group with outdated fighter aircraft.

Second, as the POTUS and US military have clearly stated, the COALTION air campaign is not intended to "dislodge" ISIS. That is the role of Iraqi, Kurdish, and Syrian moderate rebel ground forces. What the airstrikes are intended to do is slow the ISIS offensive and put it into a defensive posture; interrupt its supply chain and disrupt its command & control centers. It's hard to be advancing when you're looking up into the sky and over your shoulder. What the Coalition is basically doing is buying time and space for ground forces to unify, strategize, and dislodge ISIS as it has already done in several ISIS overrun cities.

Third, ISIS is not about Iranian backed militants unless those militants have deserted to ISIS. If Iran wants to keep its militants out of harm's way, keep them away from ISIS-held territory and out of the ISIS fight. A 2,000lb. cruise missle doesn't really care what its target's intentions are - they just become dead. No doubt with moderate Syrian insurgents turning their attention to intercepting ISIS forces in Syria as purely a defensive measure, Asaad benefits in the short-run. But I'm sure he realizes that ISIS is a threat to him and Syria's national security in the long run which is probably why he didn't object to the POTUS informing him of intent to conduct airstrikes in Syria. I think you may even see Syrian airstrikes and ground attacks as well against ISIS in Syria, just without coordination with the Coalition.

[billd766]

IMHO it is not the Wests fight at all. It is Muslims killing Muslims. The West should keep clear and the should be NO Western boots on the ground over there.

[Jingthing]

IMHO it is not the Wests fight at all. It is Muslims killing Muslims. The West should keep clear and the should be NO Western boots on the ground over there.

I think you're wrong. They have genocidal intentions against any everyone who isn't their flavor of Muslim. Leave them alone and the west will be badly attacked. They still will probably manage some attacks but more limited. I do see this as a clash of civilizations. The modern progressive west vs. something horrific from the dark ages. But now they have modern technology (communications and weapons) which means they are a real threat. I think it's time to smell the coffee and PICK A SIDE. Islam may be the "religion of peace" but Islamist movements like Al Queda and ISIS are anything but. Stop acting like you can make peace with such irrational Jihadist forces any more than it will ever be possible for Israel to make peace with the genocidal movement of Hamas (a localized representation of the same clash of civilizations).

Also don't assume this is going to be fast or easy.

These forces don't fear death the way westerners do.

They know it and they know they have that strength and the west has that weakness.

Edited September 24, 2014 by Jingthing

[arjunadawn]

meanwhile IS militants just overran another iraqi army base about 70km away from baghdad, killing or capturing upto 1000.. all the media is reporting this big airstrike success and the fact that the F-22 "had been used in combat for the first time in Syria" after cost $67 billion, it goes into a desolate part of Syria and launches an airstrike against sparsely deployed AK-47 toting irregular army militants-something an old F-15 could have done just as well, or an F-16 or A-6 even cheaper.

When these same militants took over Iraqi cities like Falluja and Ramadi during the American occupation, it took thousands of US marines and army to dislodge them.. and another US invasion of 100,000s of troops is out of the question.. so what is the point of these airstrikes.. if you bomb the IS you help the Iranian backed militia's and Assad's Syrian Army, if you bomb Iranian backed militants and Assad's Army then you help IS..

I can't understand where this military operation is going or for what purpose it could serve, other than to be expensive.

Brilliant observation. These F-22s came from where? Abu Dhabi. Few know the US has a secret airbase in AD where these fighters are based, regionally. In insisting UAE support the fray they would argue the need to use AD US jets. This may be why this token giant was used to crush an ant.

[UDONJIM]

Just a general comment about all this and I apologise in advance if there have been previous postings along similar lines

.

When I consider ISIL, I disregard their fundamental, extreme Islamist ideals. i.e. as a Christian, I don't see this as Christian v Muslim. I see ISIL as a massive band of animalistic murderers, thieves, rapists, abductors etc.etc. They are no better than any gang of vicious thugs anywhere on Earth. Where is the toothless, sleepy watchdog NATO in all this? As a Brit I'm ashamed that the cocooned Cameron does nothing to alleviate the genocide and misery being visited upon ordinary people by the ISIL filth.

PS I abhor war but sometimes you have to take action for the 'better good' of mankind e.g. against Nazi tyranny.

[meand]

When I was a teenager war broke out one time, and none of us could believe it. "We're at war, Jesus this is messed up".

Nowadays it is the status quo, and I'm sure kids don't even bat an eye when we go to war, it's Almost a biannual activity.

There has been something very wrong with the world ever since 911. It's really about that quote you always hear "it's not about your mistakes, but how you react to them that matter". America reacted by violating its citizen's rights, and fabricating wars. To me it feels like it's all downhill from here.

[arjunadawn]

When I was a teenager war broke out one time, and none of us could believe it. "We're at war, Jesus this is messed up".

Nowadays it is the status quo, and I'm sure kids don't even bat an eye when we go to war, it's Almost a biannual activity.

There has been something very wrong with the world ever since 911. It's really about that quote you always hear "it's not about your mistakes, but how you react to them that matter". America reacted by violating its citizen's rights, and fabricating wars. To me it feels like it's all downhill from here.

Thank you for a great post.

[Bwanatickey]

That old hit song , by Paul Hardcastle - Nineteen

Where the Grunt says " I didn,t really know what is going on."

I get the feeling our leaders in the West , don't know what is going on.

[Pakboong]

IMHO it is not the Wests fight at all. It is Muslims killing Muslims. The West should keep clear and the should be NO Western boots on the ground over there.

I think you're wrong. They have genocidal intentions against any everyone who isn't their flavor of Muslim. Leave them alone and the west will be badly attacked. They still will probably manage some attacks but more limited. I do see this as a clash of civilizations. The modern progressive west vs. something horrific from the dark ages. But now they have modern technology (communications and weapons) which means they are a real threat. I think it's time to smell the coffee and PICK A SIDE. Islam may be the "religion of peace" but Islamist movements like Al Queda and ISIS are anything but. Stop acting like you can make peace with such irrational Jihadist forces any more than it will ever be possible for Israel to make peace with the genocidal movement of Hamas (a localized representation of the same clash of civilizations).

Also don't assume this is going to be fast or easy.

These forces don't fear death the way westerners do.

They know it and they know they have that strength and the west has that weakness.

It is funny to me that we speak of the Arabs as if they are insurgents when it is in fact us that are the culprits. I do however, agree with your thesis that we must pick a side. If the side we pick is to save the world economy, we will all lose. Even the 1% will lose because there will be nothing left to buy and all of their money will be worthless. Problem is, that 1% don't really care about the money, it is simply Monopoly money to them and the end game is to have it all.