Pity poor Gen. Lloyd Austin --- can't get approval to kill, destroy and rebuild that shit hole called the middle east. poor feller!
On Wednesday, September 17, 2014 10:29:44 AM UTC-5, Travis wrote: > > > > > > > [[ Obarfo don't like killing muzzies cause muzzies are his bros. > > > *http://tinyurl.com/kezw4nb <http://tinyurl.com/kezw4nb>* > > *Obama vs. the generals* > > > > By Marc A. Thiessen September 15 > > Pity poor Gen. Lloyd Austin, top commander of U.S. forces in the Middle > East. > > Rarely has a U.S. general given his commander in chief better military > advice, only to see it repeatedly rejected. > > In 2010, Gen. Austin advised President Obama against withdrawing all U.S. > forces from Iraq, recommending that the president instead leave 24,000 U.S. > troops (down from 45,000) to secure the military gains made in the surge > and prevent a terrorist resurgence. Had Obama listened to Austin’s counsel, > the rise of the Islamic State could have been stopped. > > But Obama rejected Austin’s advice > <http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/06/sources-obama-administration-to-drop-troop-levels-in-iraq-to-3000/#ixzz1b3R6hETC> > > and enthusiastically withdrew all U.S. all forces from the country, > boasting that he was finally bringing an end to “the long war in Iraq.” > > Now the “long war in Iraq” is back. And because Obama has not learned from > his past mistakes, it is likely to get even longer. > > Last week, Obama announced a strategy to re-defeat the terrorists in Iraq. > But instead of listening to his commanders this time around, Obama once > again rejected the advice of . . . you guessed it . . . Gen. Lloyd Austin. > > The Post reports that, when asked for his recommendation for the best way > to defeat the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, Austin told the president > <http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/countering-islamic-state-will-be-hard-in-iraq-and-harder-in-syria-officials-say/2014/09/10/de74d448-3943-11e4-9c9f-ebb47272e40e_story.html?tid=pm_world_> > > that “his best military advice was to send a modest contingent of American > troops, principally Special Operations forces, to advise and assist Iraqi > army units in fighting the militants.” Obama was having none of it. > Austin’s recommendation, The Post reports, “was cast aside in favor of > options that did not involve U.S. ground forces in a front-line role.” > > Indeed, in his address to the nation, Obama insisted > <http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/09/10/remarks-president-barack-obama-address-nation> > > that “American forces will not have a combat mission — we will not get > dragged into another ground war in Iraq.” He declared the effort against > the Islamic State “different from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan” and > modeled instead on the air campaigns he has waged against al-Qaeda > affiliates such as the one in Yemen. > > There’s one problem with that: The air campaign in Yemen is not working. > Just this weekend al-Qaeda infiltrated forces into Yemen’s capital, Sanaa, > and Yemeni officials say that al-Qaeda’s strength in Yemen is growing > <http://online.wsj.com/articles/al-qaeda-militants-flow-into-yemens-capital-1410737916>. > > And as American Enterprise Institute counterterrorism expert Katherine > Zimmerman points out > <http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-yemen-model-wont-work-in-iraq-syria/2014/07/17/ba0ae414-0d18-11e4-8341-b8072b1e7348_story.html>, > > al-Qaeda’s Yemeni affiliate was behind a “terror threat that closed more > than 20 U.S. diplomatic posts in North Africa and the Middle East in August > 2013.” If, four years from now, the Islamic State is still strong enough to > force the closure of 20 U.S. embassies and consulates, then Obama’s > strategy to “degrade and destroy” the group will have failed. > > The Islamic State cannot be defeated from the air alone. This does not > mean a re-invasion of Iraq. But as Fred and Kimberly Kagan — two key > thinkers behind the successful 2007 surge in Iraq — point out in a new > paper, defeating the Islamic State “will require as many as 25,000 ground > troops > <http://www.understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/Defeating%20ISIS.pdf> > in Iraq and Syria.” The vast majority of those troops would play a > supporting role for several thousand U.S. Special Forces troops and special > mission units — who would be deployed in small groups embedded with Sunni > tribes (like the Sons of Iraq, who fought alongside us during the surge) as > well as Kurdish pesh merga forces and Iraqi military units. > > An air-only counterterrorism effort will fail because the Islamic State is > not, as Obama claimed in his address, “a terrorist organization, pure and > simple.” The group governs a swath of territory the size of the United > Kingdom > <http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/the-rise-of-isis-terror-group-now-controls-an-area-the-size-of-britain-expert-claims-9710198.html>. > > It rules cities. It collects taxes. It controls natural resources and is > bringing in $3 million a day in oil revenue. It has a conventional army — > one that has won battles against other conventional armies. As Obama’s own > defense secretary, Chuck Hagel, has put it, “They’re beyond just a > terrorist group. They marry ideology, sophistication of strategic and > tactical military prowess, they are tremendously well-funded. This is > beyond anything that we’ve seen. So we must prepare for everything.” > > Everything, apparently, except ground combat. > > Obama seems more concerned with distinguishing what he is doing in Iraq > from what the George W. Bush administration did than he is with following a > war strategy that will defeat the enemy. Until a few days ago, both Obama > and Secretary of State John Kerry publicly denied that we were even at war > with the Islamic State — as if calling this something other than war would > make it any less of a war. > > Yes, we are at war with the Islamic State. And if we are to “destroy” it > (as Obama promised), then the president needs to start listening to his > military commanders. > > If he keeps ignoring their advice, he may be in for a long, hard slog > <http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/09/magazine/the-way-we-live-now-11.9.03-on-language-slog.html> > > — or something far worse. > > > > > __._,_.___ > ------------------------------ > Posted by: "Beowulf" <[email protected] <javascript:>> > ------------------------------ > > > Visit Your Group > <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmbm91cHBpBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzE0MTA5NjMxNjM-> > > > > [image: Yahoo! Groups] > <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlY292MnRsBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTQxMDk2MzE2Mw--> > > • Privacy <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> • > Unsubscribe <javascript:> • Terms of Use > <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/> > > __,_._,___ > > > -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
