90 Miles From Tyranny : Ramadi and Obama’s Phony Air War Against ISIS

Thursday, April 23, 2015

Ramadi and Obama’s Phony Air War Against ISIS

The Obama Administration continues to show complete
incompetence in dealing with ISIS. Case in point: It’s decided that Ramadi, the capital of Anbar Province in western Iraq, is expendable—thereby showing it understands nothing about the value of the city or even its own capacity to defend it.

The reason? According to Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Martin Dempsey, Obama is emphasizing defending a refinery in the same province to protect the oil supplies. As if we couldn’t do both—and then some.

For the past eight months, the Administration has settled for little more than jabs when it could have landed flurries of punishing roundhouse blows. According to the latest 24-hour report Defense Department report, the U.S. launched just 36 airstrikes against ISIS in both Iraq and Syria. That’s actually much higher than normal. But nevertheless equals about one per fighter-bomber aboard the U.S. carrier normally stationed in the Persian Gulf, each of which can fly several sorties daily.

Now add in the vast numbers of area ground-based F-16s, F-15s, F-22s, A-10s, B-1 heavy bombers, helicopters, and Reaper and Predator drones among U.S. forces, plus aircraft of 11 other coalition nations. The day before there were only 13 airstrikes,fewer than a single Reaper can perform on one mission.

Cruise missiles are also in theater, and the U.S. can hit with heavy B-52 and B-2 bombers from anywhere in the world. Yet with this massive armada and with assets on the ground to help identify targets, the administration seems unable to find and strike more than a handful of targets daily. A machine gun here, a truck there. There’s been little effort to translate success in pinpoint assassination efforts,such as that which at least temporarily has knocked ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi out of the fight, into a war-fighting effort.

Which brings us back to Ramadi—a city that’s no big deal, says Dempsey. “It has no symbolic meaning.” That’s an incredible statement: The city’s meaning is both...Read The Rest HERE

No comments:

Post a Comment

Test Word Verification