War against Isis: US strategy in tatters as militants march on

[stoli]

Everyone warned Obama that some boots on the ground - special forces - were needed to guide the air war, but he ignored it for political reasons. This was easily foreseen.

The truth might be a little more sinister than that...

I am always amazed when I see a comment that means absolutely nothing, and then 2 other people "like" your comment.

[beechguy]

personal experience, working with the military in the Gulf from 1998-2008, and Iraq and Afghanistan, 2008-2012. So please do share your direct involvement in those areas.

Arjunadawn says he was extensive military / SF (?) advisory experience in the region and seems to infer the US has acted as a regional provocateur. In addition he claims:

"There is absolutely no intention to win anything resembling a war in this region. Because the underlying aims and motivations of all the players are much different than what is suggested in the press no sensible strategy could ever be mustered"

Given your extensive experience do you concur or disagree, if so why.

I don't mean to be too vague, but I'll try to give you an answer, if not precise enough, you are welcome to follow up. In the current time frame and context, I agree with Arjunadawn, there seem to be more players involved now, and they seem to be stronger than ever before. To me, it's just too chaotic to make a good decision now, if there is one, but Obama let some opportunities pass that could have made a difference. The key was staying involved and pushing them, whether they wanted us or not, and we may have had a chance to divert some of this.

As to actually winning, I didn't feel like this before, in 2003 there was a definite goal to get Sadam out, and from Arjunadawn's earlier description of what was going on with Sadam and his sons, I still think it was a good decision to go in. Same with the Taliban in Afghanistan, and I consider the two wars closely related, if not the same in many respects.

As to what we want to call a victory? I think most people are fairly ridiculous with their expectations. The Iraqis and Afghanis are never going to be like us, certainly not this soon, this is a generational change. But, ask those kids that are going to school, especially the girls, or the people that were able to open their shops again and get on with life, if it all had been a failure. Unfortunately, now we have turned it into one, for too many of them.

Edited October 13, 2014 by beechguy

[Ulysses G.]

Now before you start spouting out conspiracy theorist, blah, blah blah, do some research and make your own mind up.

I already have. These silly conspiracy theories are absurd.

Ok good, your entitled to your opinion and im entitled to mine.

By the way which part do you find absurd? Am i lying when i say that ISIS is run by Elliot Shimon aka Al Baghdadi? trained Mossad operative??

More like delusional and a link to a nutty website that constantly rolls out crazy conspiracy theories does not help your case.

ISIS Leader a Jew? Conspiracy Theory Claims al-Baghdadi is Mossad Agent Born to Jewish Parents

http://www.ibtimes.co.in/isis-leader-jew-conspiracy-theory-claims-al-baghdadi-mossad-agent-born-jewish-parents-606213

[Scott]

Please don't feed the trolls.

[pitrevie]

Yep lets look how we got there, the USA gets attacked by a group of young men mostly if not all who were from Saudi Arabia. The mastermind for the attack another Saudi national was based in Afghanistan. So what was the response of Bush, he attacks Iraq. Its lucky for us that Bush wasn't President when Pearl Harbour was attacked otherwise he might have ordered a retaliatory Doolittle strike against Bangkok.

Oh I forgot, Iraq had WMD and thus far they haven't found a peashooter. In fact Saddam Hussein confessed to his American interrogator that, at that stage he had nothing, it was all bluster for the Iranian's benefit. Can you imagine the reaction on the right if that had been a democrat who had made that blunder, the calls for impeachment would not have stopped.

Then Cheney tries to blame Obama for the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq when it was Bush and Cheney who negotiated and signed the agreement for the withdrawal of American troops. Leaving several thousand dead American and Allied servicemen, perhaps now is the time to bring up the four dead in Benghazi. Now more Americans are going to die along with others as we continue to pay for that blunder not only in lives but in the billions that it is costing our economies or should that be trillions?

What did Bush do about the instigator of the 9/11 attacks, he completely forgot about him for 8 years and it took the useless Obama some 18 months to bring him to book.

However not content with that mess, having inherited a healthy economic situation from Clinton, Bush then manages to contrive economic meltdown by the time he leaves office plunging the western economies into one of the biggest slumps since the thirties and which we are still trying to climb out of.

Obama would have very long way to go and were he to remain in office for another 8 years there is no way he would come close to matching the incompetence or the cost of the Bush presidency.

Very well, paragraph one, yes, we did attack Iraq, but you are ignoring the fact we also attacked, and stayed engaged in Afghanistan.

Paragraph two, I was in Kuwait in 1998 when Bill Clinton was in office, the U.S. Military was plenty concerned then, about Sadam coming back across the border and the threat of WMD's, especially biological. So, did Clinton also lie or make a blunder? In 2003, I was issued MOPP gear again, and this time anthrax injections, because they still couldn't prove there wasn't still a threat.

Par. 3, as to Obama pulling out, yes, I already read your other post. His mistake was not exerting more pressure, and anyone involved knows that is required to accomplish anything there, and it is happening on his watch. As to costing more casualties, you would be ignoring the fact, the casualty rate was low the last few years while we maintained a presence , but yes, it will be considerably higher if we go back in.

Par 4, I assure you the Bush administration didn't forget Bin Laden, how do you think Obama had the resources in place, to continue that part of the mission?

Also, let's not forget, that going after Bin Laden wasn't just because of 9/11. There was a record going from the first World Trade Center Bombing in 1993, through a barracks bombing in 1996, 2 Embassies in 1998, and the USS Cole, not to mention other smaller incidents that didn't make, or remain in the headlines for people like you to read.

Par 5, Neversure already gave a response to the economic question, but I'll add that it seems convenient for you guys to ignore the Democrat involvement in legislation that lead to that mess.

Par 6, Obama has already far exceeded any incompetence the Bush administration had, look at any policy you want, foreign or domestic. Only people who choose to ignore his record would say otherwise.

Now, if you wish to consider my statements as opinion only, very well. But the FACT is, they are based on personal experience, working with the military in the Gulf from 1998-2008, and Iraq and Afghanistan, 2008-2012. So please do share your direct involvement in those areas.

Para 1 so that was fact we did attack Iraq and it was based on a total lie.

Para 2 Again the fact is that no WMD was found in Iraq and just because you were based in Kuwait and took precautions against a chemical attack is no more valid than for me when I was trained in NBC warfare as a precaution. Frankly I find it laughable at that stage given the thrashing he had received in the first gulf war and with American forces now stationed in Kuwait that anyone would think it likely that Saddam Hussein would ever cross that border again. The UN inspectors on the ground in Iraq found no evidence for any WMD. Many in the US intelligence agencies also thought the evidence was not there but they were also ignored. Nowhere was this more starkly presented than when the German Foreign Minister confronted Rumsfeld very publicly and told him that he had seen no evidence to convince him of WMD. That was also true for most of the other NATO allies apart from Blair.

Para 3 The pressure was exerted by Bush and Cheney to retain a presence but the Iraqis wanted us out so they negotiated a departure date. At that stage the USA could just have refused to leave the troops were there what could the Iraqis have done but of course you need to lay the blame on Obama for not exerting pressure.

Para 4 in response to a question about Bin Laden, Bush replied, "I am not even thinking about the man."

Para 5 Yes you need to lay the blame for that economic mess elsewhere. Bush inherited 8 years of economic growth, a budget surplus and unemployment at just over 3%. At the end of his 8 years the GOP candidate for President was scurrying back to Washington in the middle of his election campaign to sort out a rescue package. An economic meltdown that also engulfed the rest of the Western World.

Para 6 We are still trying to dig our way out of the economic mess bequeathed to Obama while the GOP are still obsessed with Obama care and Benghazi in which 4 people were killed. To date there have been something like 13 hearings on Benghazi but only two on 9/11.

I would really like to know which policy mistakes of Obama's cost us as much as the billions if not trillions of dollars wasted on Iraq and which are going to cost us even more billions and trillions as a result of that catastrophic mistake. Quite apart from the wasted lives.

I would also like to know which policy mistakes of Obama's you think will result in the sort of economic mess he will bequeath to his successor that Bush bequeathed to Obama. Do tell us if you think that at the end of his term there will be a financial meltdown of the scope we saw in 2008.

You appear to think that because you were actually present on the ground that this gives you some sort of insight. I guess it must trump the experience of the UN weapons inspectors on the ground in Iraq who never found any evidence for the fantastic claims Bush made to justify this madness. Or indeed the extensive work done by the American military themselves which didn't even turn up a peashooter. Or the Intelligence agencies of the other NATO allies that saw no evidence.

[Ulysses G.]

Indeed.

[Steely Dan]

I saw a photo the other day of Turkish troops hobnobbing with ISIS fighters. The sad truth is our NATO ally Turkey has more sympathy for ISIS than it does the Kurds, it also facilitated the flow of arms and recruits to ISIS by allowing them to transit its border at will. Little wonder U.S strategy to defeat ISIS is in tatters with Erdogan being Obama's 'most trusted' ally according to his own words. The sad truth is that for reasons we can only speculate on it looks like Obama is doing the bare minimum necessary in order to appear to at least be attempting to stop ISIS. I contend that the current U.S administration has no intention of getting rid of ISIS and even if they had they lack the stomach to do what is needed.

[pitrevie]

I saw a photo the other day of Turkish troops hobnobbing with ISIS fighters. The sad truth is our NATO ally Turkey has more sympathy for ISIS than it does the Kurds, it also facilitated the flow of arms and recruits to ISIS by allowing them to transit its border at will. Little wonder U.S strategy to defeat ISIS is in tatters with Erdogan being Obama's 'most trusted' ally according to his own words. The sad truth is that for reasons we can only speculate on it looks like Obama is doing the bare minimum necessary in order to appear to at least be attempting to stop ISIS. I contend that the current U.S administration has no intention of getting rid of ISIS and even if they had they lack the stomach to do what is needed.

The sad truth is that the majority of 9/11 hijackers and the mastermind behind the attack came from one of our major gulf allies, Saudi Arabia. Its well known that funds for many of these groups also comes from major gulf states who also profess to be our allies. Do you need me to tell me who was in bed with these so called gulf allies, so nothing has changed there.

As Johnathan Miller once aptly observed, "the biggest open air lunatic asylum on the planet".

[Publicus]

I saw a photo the other day of Turkish troops hobnobbing with ISIS fighters. The sad truth is our NATO ally Turkey has more sympathy for ISIS than it does the Kurds, it also facilitated the flow of arms and recruits to ISIS by allowing them to transit its border at will. Little wonder U.S strategy to defeat ISIS is in tatters with Erdogan being Obama's 'most trusted' ally according to his own words. The sad truth is that for reasons we can only speculate on it looks like Obama is doing the bare minimum necessary in order to appear to at least be attempting to stop ISIS. I contend that the current U.S administration has no intention of getting rid of ISIS and even if they had they lack the stomach to do what is needed.

Relations between Obama and Erdogan have been on the rocks for a long time since O made that statement.

Obama's roughing It up with Erdogan began while Erdogan was PM and tried in 2011 to buy a CCP Boyz in Beijing air defense system even though Turkey is a member of Nato. The U.S. and EU Nato members came down very strongly on Erdogan and his political party which caused Erdogan to reverse the publicly announced decision and thus to deservedly chew dust.

Turkey is Syria's neighbor and it wants Assad out. Putin supports Assad. Assad has for his own reasons turned off Syria's Russian air defense systems while the U.S. and coalition allies bomb IS sites in Syria. The Saudis support a Syrian government that will allow oil pipelines through the country to Europe, which the EU thinks is a pretty good idea but which Assad and Putin think is the worst idea since T.E. Lawrence mounted a camel in Damascus.

The only ground force the U.S. coalition presently has to engage IS are the Kurds which ME leaders to include Turkey in particular try to keep closely under wraps.

Rebels on the ground in Syria welcome U.S. Coalition airstrikes for several good reasons, an important one being U.S. strikes hit the IS only and effectively while Assad's now suspended airstrikes targeted civilians to include schools in session. Coalition military leaders arrived in Washington overnight to begin revising and extending strategies so let's see what develops over the next couple of weeks..

[klikster]

Everyone warned Obama that some boots on the ground - special forces - were needed to guide the air war, but he ignored it for political reasons. This was easily foreseen.

Reports today say there are between 1000 to 1300 U.S. CIA, Special Ops, Special Forces on the ground doing that and more. There are about 300 German KS Kommandos on the ground with them, and who knows how many others from which other countries.

How many U.S. SF do you want on the ground there, 15.000? 5000? 30.000?

I'd be concerned if it started getting toward 5000 although I could accept 5000 but under only very specific and clearly defined purposes and rules of engagement. I reject any time frames as a part of the engagement.

This despite Obama being elected and re-elected to end wars rather than to start or to continue them.

How many? As many as it takes!!

Senator McCain!!!

....I know that's you!

Welcome to ThaiVisa Forums!

I'm honored to debate you.

Sorry Ms. Fonda -- I don't debate folks who would spend soldier's lives to make talking points.

[Krataiboy]

Obama's strategy is not "in ruins". It is going beautifully according to plan. Pretty soon, ISIS - the military equivalent of Ebola if one takes the word of the tame Western mass media - will have been given sufficient rope to hang or behead itself.

Turkey, fully capable now of destroying ISIS single-handed, will step up its demand for Western boots on the ground before entering the fray and Obama and lapdogs Cameron and Hollande will respond with a call for united action by coalition forces to contain the new "world terror" threat.

All that remains if for the UN Security Council to add its obligatory rubber stamp and the stage is set a reprise of the Blair-Bush invasion of Iraq (real objective: oil reserves) - plus the bonus of an illegal incursion into Syria (regime change).

So what if a few million more Iraqis and Syrians have their lives destroyed? You can't make an oil-fried omelette. . .

CIA = Al Qaida = Free Syria Army = ISIS. Do the math. Follow the links.

[pkspeaker]

Yea but most of that happened during the iran/iraq war with the USA and France supporting the Iraqi side and the soviets selling saddam weapons while all those countries boycotted Iran. The 280,000 figure for the 91 rebellion is ridiculous, The Shiite rebellion didn't last long and was quickly crushed, A few thousand were killed during that uprising.. in what other uprising did you see so many killed in such a short period of time..it did not happen.

At the time of the US invasion there was very little crime in Iraq, it didn't have alot of people in prisons, there was no shiite/sunni violence and there wasn't alqueda and like groups because Saddam kept those groups suppressed.. the invasion has killed 100,000s and turned yhe country over to IS..

Prior to his removal, estimates as to the number of Iraqis killed by Saddam's regime vary from roughly a quarter to half a million,including 50,000 to 182,000 Kurds and 25,000 to 280,000 killed during the repression of the 1991 rebellion. Estimates for the number of dead in the Iran-Iraq war range upwards from 300,000.

[F430murci]

Holy cow, I just heard this letter read on MSNBC. Obama is worse than a bad joke. We promised to assist the Kurds and then left them high and dry by giving the practically nothing. You just don't do this to people. Obama is beyond a disaster. Even if he is wrong, he should stand by his word and follow through with what was promised.

----------

Leaving a U.S. Ally Outgunned by ISIS

A Kurdish official has written to Defense Secretary Hagel pleading for the U.S. to honor its promises of military aid.

http://m.wsj.com/articles/david-tafuri-leaving-a-u-s-ally-outgunned-by-isis-1413150850?mobile=y

[Ulysses G.]

The Kurd are the only decent allies that we have in that conflict and we can't even give them decent arms to fight for us. How many times are going to let them down?

[Steely Dan]

Holy cow, I just heard this letter read on MSNBC. Obama is worse than a bad joke. We promised to assist the Kurds and then left them high and dry by giving the practically nothing. You just don't do this to people. Obama is beyond a disaster. Even if he is wrong, he should stand by his word and follow through with what was promised.

----------

Leaving a U.S. Ally Outgunned by ISIS

A Kurdish official has written to Defense Secretary Hagel pleading for the U.S. to honor its promises of military aid.

http://m.wsj.com/articles/david-tafuri-leaving-a-u-s-ally-outgunned-by-isis-1413150850?mobile=y

As I stated before Obama is exactly on the same page as Erdogan, his only issue is disguising that fact, though for the most part the MSM make that easy by not picking up on the gulf between deeds and rhetoric.

[Bwanatickey]

it was already that in 2003, now it's an old vietnam

Wait, we haven't heard the last of Afghanistan , judging by what has happened in Libya to date, much of the same outcome in the future I presume.

[Jay Sata]

Where are Bush and Blair now .

The architects of this disaster.

As for US foreign policy and success they are a joke.

Massive investment in high tech military hardware and yet once again back street soldiers are running rings around them just like in Vietnam and Afghanistan.

[beechguy]

Where are Bush and Blair now .

The architects of this disaster.

As for US foreign policy and success they are a joke.

Massive investment in high tech military hardware and yet once again back street soldiers are running rings around them just like in Vietnam and Afghanistan.

Things were going fine when they left, U.S. killed went from 961 in 2007, to 322 in 2008. 154 in 2009, and 60 in 2010. Villages and schools were getting back to normal, max Iraqi casualties 3890 in August, 2006, down to 246 in December, 2008,

Just curious, at what point do you expect the current President to take responsibility for anything?

Edited October 13, 2014 by beechguy

[Publicus]

Reports today say there are between 1000 to 1300 U.S. CIA, Special Ops, Special Forces on the ground doing that and more. There are about 300 German KS Kommandos on the ground with them, and who knows how many others from which other countries.

How many U.S. SF do you want on the ground there, 15.000? 5000? 30.000?

I'd be concerned if it started getting toward 5000 although I could accept 5000 but under only very specific and clearly defined purposes and rules of engagement. I reject any time frames as a part of the engagement.

This despite Obama being elected and re-elected to end wars rather than to start or to continue them.

How many? As many as it takes!!

Senator McCain!!!

....I know that's you!

Welcome to ThaiVisa Forums!

I'm honored to debate you.

Sorry Ms. Fonda -- I don't debate folks who would spend soldier's lives to make talking points.

To be polite, I'd simply say the post is a cheap shot at a poster who volunteered for military service in the U.S. Army Infantry via ROTC.

Jane Fonda was wrong back then, much later apologized for it. I never supported what she did in Hanoi during the Vietnam War, which I eventually came to oppose and to successfully demonstrate against.

The post is actually more of a Richard Nixon statement than it might be a Sen John McCain one.

[klikster]

Senator McCain!!!

....I know that's you!

Welcome to ThaiVisa Forums!

I'm honored to debate you.

Sorry Ms. Fonda -- I don't debate folks who would spend soldier's lives to make talking points.

To be polite, I'd simply say the post is a cheap shot at a poster who volunteered for military service in the U.S. Army Infantry via ROTC.

Jane Fonda was wrong back then, much later apologized for it. I never supported what she did in Hanoi during the Vietnam War, which I eventually came to oppose and to successfully demonstrate against.

The post is actually more of a Richard Nixon statement than it might be a Sen John McCain one.

Yet your post comparing ol' klikster to J. McCain was in no way a cheap shot at someone who volunteered and served on a SF A-Team in 'Nam -- and who was never accused of collaboration.

BTW, I opposed the war by serving there -- and never "demonstrated" against the men who served there.

You seem to be more proud of your "successful demonstration(s)" than of your service. If not, perhaps I misread?

Edited October 16, 2014 by Scott

[Hardie]

Yet another miserable chapter in the shamefully failed presidency of Barack Obama who will go down in history as the worst ,most inefficient and ineffectual United States president.

You and your racist buddies wish... Obama is doing EXACTLY the right thing, as history will likely prove. If the Mideast can't take care of itself, it's not for the US to 'save.'

Edited October 15, 2014 by Hardie

[bigjules007]

Truth be told, if the U.K and the U.S had kept there noses out of the middle east , instead of constantly interfering, and supporting there bum buddies Israel, they would not be in the predicament they are in today. The west loves a war, it makes people rich.

There is definitely something more sinister going on then most of you can imagine. I would take what your respective governments tell you with a pinch of salt.

Has no one seen the photos with Mcain sitting in a meeting attended by Al Baghdadi before he was Al Baghdadi? This whole situation stinks. And i'd better stop there because no doubt im going to get another warning for expressing my opinion about ISIS.

[Publicus]

Senator McCain!!!

....I know that's you!

Welcome to ThaiVisa Forums!

I'm honored to debate you.

Sorry Ms. Fonda -- I don't debate folks who would spend soldier's lives to make talking points.

To be polite, I'd simply say the post is a cheap shot at a poster who volunteered for military service in the U.S. Army Infantry via ROTC.

Jane Fonda was wrong back then, much later apologized for it. I never supported what she did in Hanoi during the Vietnam War, which I eventually came to oppose and to successfully demonstrate against.

The post is actually more of a Richard Nixon statement than it might be a Sen John McCain one.

Yet your post comparing ol' klikster to J. McCain was in no way a cheap shot at someone who volunteered and served on a SF A-Team in 'Nam -- and who was never accused of collaboration.

BTW, I opposed the war by serving there -- and never "demonstrated" against the men who served there.

You seem to be more proud of your "successful demonstration(s)" than of your service. If not, perhaps I misread?

I'll try yet again to reply to your post and hope this one stays put.

I'm sure your service was distinguished and honorable.

Still, based on reading your last line I'd recommend as follows....

http://www.collegetransition.org/promisingpractices.research.readingstrategies.html

[thespecialist6]

1. Lets start a white flag for justice and peace to counter isis black flag

2. any of these terrorists who get holed up in buildings lets put the terrorists parents in front of the building

and tell them to call their sons or daughters to give up and surrender.

3. ALL terrorist who kill when caught should be publically executed by cutting off their heads and put it on internet and tell the other terrorists that this will happen to them when caught, also before cutting thier heads off they should cut their hands off as they do in arab countries to criminals.

[thespecialist6]

Yea but most of that happened during the iran/iraq war with the USA and France supporting the Iraqi side and the soviets selling saddam weapons while all those countries boycotted Iran. The 280,000 figure for the 91 rebellion is ridiculous, The Shiite rebellion didn't last long and was quickly crushed, A few thousand were killed during that uprising.. in what other uprising did you see so many killed in such a short period of time..it did not happen.

At the time of the US invasion there was very little crime in Iraq, it didn't have alot of people in prisons, there was no shiite/sunni violence and there wasn't alqueda and like groups because Saddam kept those groups suppressed.. the invasion has killed 100,000s and turned yhe country over to IS

..

1. civilised countries also should give our young people a job of looking after elderly people and pay them about 25% more than been on the social security at least it would give them a sense of pride , and let them see the good they are doing instead of been on the streets bored and disalussioned and getting influenced by this crap evil ideology and on top of helping the elderly it will save the council thousands of pounds in private carer costs as the young people would do a good job in looking after the elderly.

Prior to his removal, estimates as to the number of Iraqis killed by Saddam's regime vary from roughly a quarter to half a million,including 50,000 to 182,000 Kurds and 25,000 to 280,000 killed during the repression of the 1991 rebellion. Estimates for the number of dead in the Iran-Iraq war range upwards from 300,000.