Leon Panetta tells CBS News we should coulda woulda stuck around a bit longer in Iraq, and armed the Syrian rebels much sooner:
Former Defense Secretary: U.S. in Syria too late, left Iraq too soon
Another former Defense Secretary, Robert Gates, had chimed in earlier last week on Obama's bootless pledge:
Robert Gates: Barack Obama ‘traps himself’ on ISIL
Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates on Wednesday said the U.S. will need troops on the ground to fight the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant and spoke out against President Barack Obama’s contention that the U.S. aims to degrade and destroy the group.
“The reality is they’re not going to be able to be successful against ISIS strictly from the air” or by relying on Iraqi or peshmerga forces, Gates said on CBS This Morning, using an alternate name for the terrorist organization.
...
“[T]here will be boots on the ground if there’s to be any hope of success in the strategy,” he said. “And I think that by continuing to repeat that — the president, in effect, traps himself.”
Obama will be making that booty call one day, and there will be hell (and Michelle!) to pay.
Obama’s just not that smart©.
Posted by: MarkO | September 20, 2014 at 11:27 AM
Who hasn't he lost?
Posted by: Jane | September 20, 2014 at 11:29 AM
And General Conway, USMC, retd, former Commandant, says yesterday, not a snowball's chance in Hell of the resident's plan working...
http://dailycaller.com/2014/09/19/retired-head-of-marine-corps-obamas-isis-strategy-doesnt-have-a-snowballs-chance-in-hell-of-succeeding/
Posted by: Sandy fallow districts~engorged capitol Daze | September 20, 2014 at 11:29 AM
Man the photo of Obama on Drudge right now is mighty scary.
Posted by: Centralcal on iPad | September 20, 2014 at 11:31 AM
Oh, and I call third, or"show" although truth be told, I started my comment before there were any Jane and MarkO had posted, difficult doing this on a phone/communicator.
Posted by: Sandy fallow districts~engorged capitol Daze | September 20, 2014 at 11:33 AM
"Only minutes before the breach, Obama had boarded his helicopter on the South Lawn with his daughters and one of their friends, who was joining the Obamas for a weekend getaway to Camp David, the presidential retreat in Maryland. First lady Michelle Obama had traveled separately to Camp David."
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_WHITE_HOUSE_INTRUDER?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2014-09-20-04-59-08
It's like Michelle & Barack don't even like each other.
Posted by: Janet | September 20, 2014 at 11:36 AM
At least they don't pretend, like the Clintons.
Posted by: Ignatz | September 20, 2014 at 11:43 AM
ISIS/ISIL/IS.
Could we all do a nationwide rock, paper scissors on what to call these guys?
Posted by: Ignatz | September 20, 2014 at 11:45 AM
iggy,
I prefer the universal Islamic Terrorist because there is not a nickle's worth of difference between any of them either here, there or anywhere.
Frederick's team won 5-1 with one kid getting a hat trick + one:)
Posted by: Jim Eagle | September 20, 2014 at 11:50 AM
Islamic NAZIs. ...?
Posted by: Sandy fallow districts~engorged capitol Daze | September 20, 2014 at 12:03 PM
I prefer IS myself.
That's what they call themselves and it states simply and plainly what they wish to do and become and what a pure Islamic state adhering closely to all tenets of the faith looks like; hell on earth.
Posted by: Ignatz | September 20, 2014 at 12:09 PM
IS --> islamic Supremacists ...?
Has the benefit of using their "IS" but identifying them for what they are, in addition to being islamic, also "Supremacist"
No matter what, I have tried to stop using isis & isil because it clouds the discussion.
Posted by: Sandy fallow districts~engorged capitol Daze | September 20, 2014 at 12:12 PM
How much have the separate transports to the same destinations cost us?
Posted by: Johns_Creek_Bill | September 20, 2014 at 12:13 PM
If you count the separate trips to Hawaii and Martha's Vineyard I'd say it's in the millions. I've probably left out a destination or two.
Posted by: maryd | September 20, 2014 at 12:19 PM
Who hasn't he lost?
Catalist.
Posted by: Threadkiller | September 20, 2014 at 12:25 PM
I prefer:
Statehood Hope'n Islamic Twits
Posted by: Some Guy | September 20, 2014 at 12:54 PM
Gelerntner has a pice on NRO which summarizes my feelings regarding the Amalgamated Headchopper situation. I don't have any problem whatsoever with the Kurds as spear point of the eradication effort. The Kurd ROE make recidivism unlikely among the headchoppers they encounter.
The Turks got their hostages back, France and the US are bombing Mosul to soften it prior to the Kurds beginning their urban renewal effort, refined product inventories in Headchopper Land continue to fall and no American jackass has mentioned Pottery Barn rules.
I'm quite willing to wait for the Silent Arab Spring prior to declaring the current state of affairs unsatisfactory in Syria and Iraq.
Posted by: Rick B | September 20, 2014 at 01:21 PM
From a Josh Jordan tweet:
@NumbersMuncher: Gallup: Obama job approval falls four points overnight to drop to fifteen points underwater at 40-55.
---------
Down and down he goes . . . Hurry, hurry, hurry.
Posted by: Centralcal on iPad | September 20, 2014 at 01:28 PM
Kurds might/might be persuaded to "liberate" Mosul, but it will take more convincing than just A few shipments of new German weapons. Mosul would add to a strategic geographic buffer between Kurdistan and the arabs.
It is the stuff of fantasy, though, to expect that after such a liberation, that the Kurds would consider "giving back" Mosul to the central government in Baghdad.
The geographic area we have known for the entirety of our lives as Iraq, is gone. The Kurds will not rejoin the arab portion to the south, even if Baghdad gets its stuff together and some how (fat chance) is able to drive the headchoppers out.
Just won't happen.
Posted by: Sandy fallow districts~engorged capitol Daze | September 20, 2014 at 01:34 PM
very much on point, Sandy, the Baath drove the Kurds out of Mosul back during the Anfal campaign,
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/interview-with-ahmad-chalabi-on-islamic-state-iraq-and-syria-a-991659.html
he might have had some Iranian contacts, Barzani did as well as I recall, but he didn't serve as a blatant Iranian agent,
Posted by: narciso | September 20, 2014 at 01:37 PM
Sandy,
It's not just Germany. I agree the Kurds would not give Mosul back but they may just seek to turn it into a flaming pile of trash as an object lesson for the Sunni headchoppers.
Posted by: Rick B | September 20, 2014 at 01:59 PM
I'd like to see just what is being given. I think much of the blather about support to the Kurds is just that, I.e. non-lethal military materials being called "arms." Elsewhere I read some time ago that Canadian aid, for instance, was just uniforms, or something similar.
I've got info on a dissent machine, BRB.
Posted by: Sandy fallow districts~engorged capitol Daze | September 20, 2014 at 02:15 PM
Dissent s/b different. gawd, Android autocorrect...
Posted by: Sandy fallow districts~engorged capitol Daze | September 20, 2014 at 02:16 PM
Rick,
(The article you linked was from 27 Aug..., not that it was not accurate, but like a Missourian, you gotta show me, not just tell me what you will do...)
From two sources with good access and significant time in country,
(I think I posted some of this on JoM a couple weeks ago), date of information 5/6 Sep:
First, from Erbil:
Highly reliable source reported 5 September as follows: German Military arriving with Military gear at EIA (Erbil) today – aircraft will stop in BIAP (Baghdad) first for inspection. Gear on route for Pehmarga forces:
16,000 automatic rifles, 40 machine guns, more than 750 anti-tank weapons and missiles, flare guns, 10,000 hand grenades, armored trucks, one fueling truck, and five personnel transport vehicles.
Our comment: Will be interesting to see if any of this shipment reaches Kurds. No previous ones of almost any kind, that is weapons or humanitarian, have as Baghdad and Washington have wanted to limit the autonomous ability of the Kurds.
and second, from Baghdad:
In the “for what it’s worth” column, there is, not surprisingly, a huge amount of activity in Baghdad right now on weapons and ammunition procurement. Latest effort being put together by a team of US and Jordanian business people is to equip Iraqi Bell 407/412 Helos with Hydra 70 rocket launchers and .50 cal Gatlings; and to refurbish some AH-1 Cobras being provided by South Korea.
The Iraqis, however, are their own worst enemies in some areas. The 140 M1 tanks they acquired? They decided to buy only small quantities of up-front ammo on cost grounds; and consequently have been taking container deliveries of 20 – 30 year old inventory from the USG to stop gap since the IS issue arose. Had they ordered what was recommended to them in the first place, they would have been an effective force. As it is, the old adage about a tank without ammunition being nothing more than a very expensive target is holding true.
Meanwhile, the Lebanese received a “donation” from the Saudis and are looking at weaponizing their fleet of UH-1’s. Apparently, this is their #1 priority right now.
... the Canadians have been providing a great deal of “soft” equipment into theater (helmets, vests, uniforms); and the Brits are shipping in a ton of .50 cal ammo over the course of the next several weeks. At least these countries are doing something.
Posted by: Sandy--Engorged Capital~Fallow Districts--Daze | September 20, 2014 at 02:32 PM
Mosul is a big place, Iraq's second largest city...
...err, perhaps I should have said, the IS's largest city.
No matter.
The Kurdish manpower necessary to destroy the IS holding Mosul, and to defeat IS reinforcements from Syria, which would undoubtedly immediately start flowing into the AO, would be significant indeed. IN such a scenario, either the Kurds would need to send more men, or risk defeat, even if/IF the US and frenchies were to provide air support. Without precision engagement (not likely without US controllers) in a dense urban environment, US CAS (either NavAir or USAF) could easily hit Kurd forces as well as IS forces. The potential for a real soup sandwich.
More, the amount of Kurd men and material needed for such an objective would likely reduce force posture in other key areas, e.g. the existing Kurdish "Iron Curtain," the deployments of Kurd forces to newly acquired areas (e.g. Kirkuk and smaller towns, villages, and land mass) , and general security posture.
All in all, without some "security guarantees" from a patron, I find it difficult to believe that the Kurds would expose themselves to a significantly weakened security posture for current responsibilities, in order to take Mosul, even if they go with liberal ROE, that is kill everyone and let G-D sort it out, a sow-the-sand-with-salt approach.
Posted by: Sandy--Engorged Capital~Fallow Districts--Daze | September 20, 2014 at 02:43 PM
Sandy,
The way I see it that is exactly the point. A stalemate no victors, none vanquished. The Kurds will get what they need to safeguard their area, the Shi'as will have their area safeguarded by the Iranians. Those caught in the middle well, good luck to them.
Posted by: Bori | September 20, 2014 at 02:54 PM
the Iranians aren't a guarantee, they have fielded forces both in Iraq and Syria, with mixed results,
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/09/dem-rep-40-isis-fighters-have-returned-to-the-us-video/
the core of ISIS as was with their predecessor was Sunni tribesman, the ones who ran the Anfal, whose grandparents were part of the Golden Square,
Posted by: narciso | September 20, 2014 at 03:04 PM
Narc,
You are right, safeguarded is a bad choice of words, backed-up would be a better description.
The Sunni ISIS has promised to destroy Karbala as they have done 2 or 3 times previously during previous incursions in the past. The Iranians have pledged to protect their holy place.
Posted by: Bori | September 20, 2014 at 03:13 PM
The IS is already encircling Baghdad, requiring US airstrikes a few days ago against IS targets SOUTH-WEST of Baghdad (1) which is evidence of the IS long-term plan to encircle and then strangle BAghdad (2).
(1) http://www.longwarjournal.org/threat-matrix/archives/2014/09/us_air_campaign_against_islami.php
(2)http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2014/06/analysis_isis_allies.php
With the temperatures now moderating in Iraq, the real fighting can begin.
Over the next few months one can look to the IS tightening the noose around Baghdad (as well as increased bombings etc inside BAghdad) and increasing IS activity to the east, Southeast and south of Baghdad toward Basrah.
A snowball has a better chance in hell than this effed-up approach... (3)
(3) http://dailycaller.com/2014/09/19/retired-head-of-marine-corps-obamas-isis-strategy-doesnt-have-a-snowballs-chance-in-hell-of-succeeding/
Posted by: Sandy--Engorged Capital~Fallow Districts--Daze | September 20, 2014 at 03:15 PM
Iranian "back-up" to Iraqi central government forces, in numbers sufficient to make a difference, will be a sight to behold.
I would not hold my breath, for several reasons.
Posted by: Sandy--Engorged Capital~Fallow Districts--Daze | September 20, 2014 at 03:19 PM
From a previous thread, look what showed up on Twitter:
Richard Besser @DrRichardBesser 15m
SUNDAY on @ThisWeekABC: Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel discusses w/ me his @TheAtlantic magazine article “Why I Hope to Die at 75”
See, it is going to be one of those "things which we need to have a discussion about". I figure there will be more of this in the coming months.
Posted by: Miss Marple | September 20, 2014 at 03:25 PM
Surely in the 20s when the Brits pulled out,
two things happened, the Ikwan raiders moved north, in the Shia highlands, there was further dispossession of the Shia from the professions, as Batuta pointed out,
Posted by: narciso | September 20, 2014 at 03:30 PM
yes, Carlos Slim's had a field day at such sloppiness,
http://shoebat.com/2014/09/19/dammit-focus-names-people-whose-identities-know/
Posted by: narciso | September 20, 2014 at 03:43 PM
Barring some drastic changes, I do agree that Baghdad is in grave danger. This will be a big test to the current strategy, how effective will aerial bombing be once inside the city's perimeter.
How many of the 40% Sunni now in Baghdad will join ISIS as the noose gets tighter? How do you tell ISIS from others when they are inside?
Posted by: Bori | September 20, 2014 at 03:44 PM
And it came to pass that God said: Obama, if you can find 10 righteous "moderate" Islamists, I will save your foreign policy
Posted by: Neo | September 20, 2014 at 03:47 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/secret-service-reviews-white-house-security-after-fence-jumper-enters-mansion/2014/09/20/23df4f6a-40e0-11e4-b03f-de718edeb92f_story.html
It's the dog's fault. Yeah, that's the ticket! Blame the dog!
Posted by: Miss Marple | September 20, 2014 at 04:24 PM
Q. "How do you tell ISIS from others when they are inside?"
A. One group is choping heads; the other group, not so much...
Posted by: Sandy fallow districts~engorged capitol Daze | September 20, 2014 at 04:42 PM
Kurds just entered Syria from Turkey and Iraq to help the Syrian Kurds..Great guys..and gals. Deserve much more support form us/
Posted by: clarice | September 20, 2014 at 05:28 PM
Curtain, reviews come down on taxpayer-funded climate change musical
NSF = Government + "Science."
Posted by: Extraneus | September 20, 2014 at 05:41 PM
The Iraqi Kurds have well more than 35,000 trained troops, but at the same time they must defend against the Shia.
The savages are playing all sides against the middle and we have little to no direct influence on any of the players. Our media is basically ignoring our involvement expect in the power wars of Washington.
American men and women are going into danger again and we are being kept in the dark. OPSEC or White House CYA?
Posted by: matt | September 20, 2014 at 05:43 PM
I don't see the point of this "war." It's not about protecting the Iraqi people from the headchoppers or Sharia law. That's the last thing this is about.
Democrats never cared about the Iraqi people. Obama himself said he wished they'd stayed under the domination of the ghoul Saddam and his sadistic sons, and that even if he knew the surge would work, he'd have been against it just to make a political point. Just like Vietnam, they don't care if millions of people are slaughtered, as long as they can make their political point.
We did a great thing by liberating those people. The lady with the purple finger, the constitution they voted on, the multiple elections. All we had to do was stay in place and they'd be educating their sons and daughters right now, creating businesses, growing a country.
Obama threw that all away, on purpose, damning a lot of innocent people to their fate. The only reason we're back there is because the jihadis made Obama look bad. That's why there's no strategy. He couldn't give a damn about the people there.
I realize that nation building and the thought of helping to create a democracy - where people were formerly hung from hooks, had their tongues cut out, their wives raped on video, their daughters plucked from wedding parties, forced into limos and sadistically killed by the leader's own sons for sexual thrills - was idealistic, but it was working. It was a strategy.
Why don't the Republicans ever call them out for this immorality?
Sorry for the long post, but the whole thing just disgusts me.
Posted by: Extraneus | September 20, 2014 at 06:36 PM
Panetta and Gates are do dumb that Obama had to let them go. They were taking the shine off his brilliant strategy.
And I've got a bridge to sell you--cheap.
Posted by: Comanche Voter | September 20, 2014 at 06:38 PM
Truly, Ext, this is why Chalabi had to be demonized, why Powell came up with that ridiculous 'pottery barn', Iraq was all jagged shards, members of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad
(Zawahiri and Papa Beetle) were already in place, Fitz had to do his witch hunt, even though Rove probably didn't help himself
Posted by: narciso | September 20, 2014 at 06:47 PM
Well said--no apologies necessary, Extraneus.
BZ.
Posted by: Sandy fallow districts~engorged capitol Daze | September 20, 2014 at 07:22 PM
yes, we are in the best of hands;
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/09/isis-social-media-state-department
Posted by: narciso | September 20, 2014 at 07:33 PM
Amen, Extraneus...amen.
Posted by: Janet | September 20, 2014 at 07:55 PM