Obama: 'I don't think we're losing' fight with Islamic State: Atlantic
Source: Reuters
U.S. President Barack Obama said the fall of the Iraqi city of Ramadi to Islamic State militants was a "tactical setback" but in an interview released on Thursday he said that "I don't think we're losing" the fight against the group.
"There's no doubt that in the Sunni areas, we're going to have to ramp up not just training, but also commitment, and we better get Sunni tribes more activated than they currently have been," Obama said in the interview, conducted on Tuesday with The Atlantic.
"I think Prime Minister Abadi is sincere and committed to an inclusive Iraqi state, and I will continue to order our military to provide the Iraqi security forces all assistance that they need in order to secure their country, and Ill provide diplomatic and economic assistance thats necessary for them to stabilize," Obama told the magazine.
Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/05/21/us-mideast-crisis-obama-idUSKBN0O622C20150521
BeyondGeography
(39,284 posts)AngryDem001
(684 posts)He does not hunger for war like the swine in the Republican party. He does not salivate at the thought of young men and women dying in some hellhole.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)On Thursday, the Senate Armed Services Committee convened a hearing to evaluate and scrutinize the effectiveness of the Obama administrations policies in the Middle East, especially in Iraq and Syria. General Jack Keane, who was the first witness to testify, argued that the fall of Ramadi signalsand indeed provesthat the Obama administration's current strategy in the region has failed.
While there has been some progress and some success, looking at this strategy today, we know now that the conceptual plan is fundamentally flawed, he stated. The resources provided to support Iraq are far from adequate. The timing and urgency to provide arms, equipment, and training is insufficient. And as such we are not only failing, we are losing this war.
Moreover, I can say with certainty that this strategy will not defeat ISIS, he added.
And yet, he also explained the importance of defeating ISIS in Syria, which is where the group is headquartered and carries out its operations.
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/danieldoherty/2015/05/21/hearing-on-iraqsyria-n2002103
Fournier
(42 posts)I doubt that it will sell.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)"No safe haven" sort of thing. Right now we are playing footsie with them in Syria because we don't like Assad.
Fournier
(42 posts)Then it changes all the time. Do we have a foreign policy? Or do we just make it up as we go along? Actually these are rhetorical questions. I can't figure anything out anymore, except that the US does whatever big oil thinks it wants.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality-based_community
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)bemildred
(90,061 posts)Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)Actually, they are often the only ones that will admit to it.
Fournier
(42 posts)It gives me the chills every time I see it.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)You don't want to be anywhere around that kind of dumb ass.
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)jtuck004
(15,882 posts)peacebird
(14,195 posts)TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)in Syria (Kobane) with crushing air strikes for weeks on end, because it was seen as vital at that time to deny ISIS a win (crush morale, discourage recruiting, etc.), but Ramadi was kind of written off by the Joint Chiefs as not terribly important weeks ago, although it's much bigger and more strategically located--and now it seems like a big deal that it fell. Lots of attention paid to getting one guy in Syria, but a city of 500,000 in Iraq = no big deal? Obviously the thinking on this war has changed. Edit to add: where'd John Allen, The War Czar go?
bemildred
(90,061 posts)We need to pick a side.
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)We protect our "friends" (I need another thread to expound on that). Iraq? We didn't think much of them in 2001, less in 2015.
Yupster
(14,308 posts)is as far away from Saudi Arabia as a place can be in Syria.
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)democrank
(11,052 posts)he`d better think again.
LuckyLib
(6,814 posts)wants" is a real eye-opener.
http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/
bemildred
(90,061 posts)All that stuff there is just cargo cult bullshit for the Rubes it sucks in.
jamzrockz
(1,333 posts)Don't forget destroy secular Arab societies and historical artifacts. Find them and kill them. Why Obama is sanctioning the people fighting ISIS and not pressuring Turkey and Saudi Arabia to end their support for ISIS is beyond me. I cannot imagine Assad being worse than ISIS or the radical Islamist rebels vying for power.
Time to end this nonsense of trying to prolong the war in the hope of of these crazy outside groups wins. You don't even have to spend any money or sacrifice any US lives. Just get out of the way and let the Syria people with the army crush the evil men.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Islamic State militants overran Iraqi government defences east of the city of Ramadi on Thursday, police and pro-government tribal fighters said.
The defensive line was breached at Husaiba, about 10 km (six miles) from the city, on Thursday afternoon after IS fighters intensified mortar and rocket fire.
The situation is very critical now after Daesh (IS) fighters managed to overrun our defensive line in Husaiba," Police major Khalid al-Fahdawi said.
"We have retreated to the eastern part of the area and were waiting for more reinforcements and air force strikes to stop the Daesh advance.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/05/21/us-mideast-crisis-iraq-ramadi-idUSKBN0O62BY20150521
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Terror group faced little resistance from local forces in Palmyra and Ramadi, prompting re-evaluations across a region that had sensed it might be in retreat
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/21/isis-palmyra-ramadi-advances-say-more-about-state-weakness-than-jihadi-strength
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Earning that promotion can be tough, and it can be even harder when that top job goes to the bosss friends and family instead of the most deserving candidate. In the Islamic State, where martyrdom is the aspiration of many militants, reports are circulating that wait lists to become suicide bombers in Iraq are being manipulated to favor Saudi fighters over militants from other regions. Even in the self-declared caliphate, its hard to shake the yoke of nepotism.
The accusation of favoritism comes from Kamil Abu Sultan ad-Daghestani, a pro-Islamic State preacher from Dagestan, a region in Russias North Caucasus where many have gone to wage jihad in Iraq and Syria. In a recent post on the Russian language jihadi website Qonah, Kamil reiterated complaints of nepotism passed on to him by Akhmed Chatayev, also known as Akhmed al-Shishani, a senior Chechen militant in charge of the Islamic States Yarmouk Battalion in Syria.
Those Saudis have got things sewn up, they wont let anyone in, wrote Kamil, expressing concerns passed on to him by Chatayev. They are letting their relatives go to the front of the queue using blat, a Russian word meaning connections or informal agreements.
In another anecdote, Kamil tells of a would-be suicide bomber who, after waiting on the list for martyrdom in Syria, moved to Iraq where there is a much shorter wait. He went there [Iraq] because in Syria there is a very long line, wrote Kamil. But after waiting for three months with no chance to be a suicide bomber, the young militant found that senior Islamic State members from Saudi Arabia were favoring other Saudis by putting them to the top of the list. With his opportunity to be a suicide bomber thwarted by nepotism and bureaucracy, the frustrated young militant returned to Syria where he told his story to Chatayev, who in turn passed it along to Kamil.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/05/21/want-to-be-an-islamic-state-suicide-bomber-get-in-line/
daleo
(21,317 posts)Or joining to die.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Some people blow up a building or shoot up a school, other people get sold the idea of virgins (what is this thing with virgins anyway? are they nuts?) and a spot on the roll of martyrs. I suppose it depends on what sort of stories you are told when you are at an impressionable age.
Javaman
(62,439 posts)Fournier
(42 posts)That is not the most optimistic assessment I have ever seen. It's even less sanguine than General Westmoreland's "light at the end of the tunnel."
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)the Iraqi army (Sunni) outnumbered ISIL (Sunni) 5 to 1 and withdrew from Ramadi rather than engage.
The Baghdad government (Shia) is mistrusted by the military (Sunni) which is very leery of supporting a government which has allowed Shia militias to massacre Sunni civilians in the past with no consequences. And now we anticipate Iranian Shia militias coming in to fight the Sunni ISIL in Ramadi.
We are trying to help reduce and eliminate barbaric behaviors, but we are not losing.
We are out of there!
jamzrockz
(1,333 posts)as Al Malaki was forced out of power, everything was going to be ok and he left and now that is not enough for the sunnis? the is just BS, if the so called massacre which I am yet to see evidence for by the shia will cause the sunni to run into ISIS arms or refuse to fight for their country, then why did we kick Al Malaki out. He should have just stay on and continue to work with Iran and continue the fight.
I think there is a lot of moving parts outside the control of the Iraqis and every failure or destruction of Iraqi society is quickly blamed on sunni shia rivalry.
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)and substitute Vietnam for Iraq and we see how, no matter the President, no matter the date, the militarists in charge of the US Empire always feel that there is a military solution for everything.
And when the military solution fails, as it always does, the militarists look for someone or something to blame.
Can we see the light at the end of the tunnel yet?
oberliner
(58,724 posts)What would President Guillaumeb do?
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)started with Jimmy Carter. It continued under Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton, Bush Jr. and Obama. The US has allied itself with many groups in many countries, all for geopolitical advantage.
The US is constantly establishing military bases all over this area to ensure access to resources and as a way of surrounding Russia and China with bases and allies.
The US has also sold armaments to virtually every country in that area. So any talk from US leaders about establishing democracy, or ensuring freedom for oppressed people must be filtered through the reality of US history.
And no one President can accomplish anything alone. But one way to start would be to reduce the war budget by about 90% and use some of the money to rebuild the decaying infrastructure in the country. Putting people to work repairing infrastructure, insulating homes, putting money into decaying schools, establishing a single payer healthcare system, all these things could go a long way toward transforming this country.
Did I mention an Amendment prohibiting political contributions and raising the top marginal tax rate back to 90%?
How about you, Oberliner? What would President Oberliner do?
PS. While I did not specifically answer your question about IS, it is a creation of and a reaction to US interference in that region. Same as Al Qaeda, which was funded by the US.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)I get your point about the big picture and the history of the region, but is there anything that you think ought to be done in the here and now with respect to what is going on with IS or do you think the US should just stay out of it and focus on infrastructure and the other items you mentioned?
If I were president, I'd try to gather together some experts who know the region and the situation really well and see what sorts of suggestions they had. Basically, that's me saying I have no idea how to address the situation.
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)what I would do if I were President. I laid out my domestic priorities.
But the US has a habit of interfering everywhere in the world and justifying the intervention as promoting democracy, or making the world safe for freedom loving people, or, the current favorite, fighting terrorism. The only problem with the justifications for intervention is that no one, with the exception of the American people, is fooled by the US explanations.
So yes, I think the US should refrain from interfering in the affairs of every country in the world. The problems in the Middle East started with the colonialists who marched into the region and divided up countries that were not theirs to divide. The US simply followed in the footsteps of the Europeans in this. The problems of this colonial interference are evident in Israel, Palestine, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Turkey, as well as most of the sub- Saharan African countries.
My view is that ISIS, and Hamas, and Al Qaeda are all responses to outside intervention by the West. When the USSR tried to place missiles in Cuba during the 1960s, the US was outraged, calling it a warlike move, but the US has been surrounding Russia with missiles and bases since the end of the Second World War.
The war against Libya was supposed to remove a brutal dictator and usher in a better atmosphere for the Libyans. We all know how that worked out. As well as the interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan.
So yes, the US should, but will not, stay out of the affairs of other countries.
I appreciate the honesty of your last paragraph. I think the problem is that, no matter the President, the same experts are always consulted. With the same results.