ISIS totally defeated in Iraq

[Darth Omar]

Yep.

Indeed, as much as Trump wailed and bellowed about Obama's strategy in Iraq, as much as he blustered that he had " a secret plan" to defeat ISIS in 30 days (a plan so secret he couldn't tell anyone), he still basically just continued the main outlines of the Obama strategy.

You know what happens to people at any job I have had who try to take credit for the accomplishments, plans, and ideas of other people? They become the most despised people at work and are treated as social outcasts.

The secret is out on Trump’s ISIS plan and they are defeated, not only in Iraq but in Syria.

Trump didn’t telegraph his intention to give field commanders autonomy or in his intention to stop arming terrorists in Syria.

Neither idea is rocket science. But that’s the point, for about a decade, US foreign policy was devoid of simple, common sense.

[dukkha]

Trump is basically continuing the plan formulated under Obama’s administration in Iraq.

the improvement was battlefield autonomy..it's a big thing, especially when working with a coalition

[dukkha]

The secret is out on Trump’s ISIS plan and they are defeated, not only in Iraq but in Syria.

Trump didn’t telegraph his intention to give field commanders autonomy or in his intention to stop arming terrorists in Syria.

Neither idea is rocket science. But that’s the point, for about a decade, US foreign policy was devoid of simple, common sense.

unfortunately Obama continued the idea of regime change in Libya and Syria.
Arming the rebels was just as bad policy, as was friends of Syria as assassinating Qadaffi-if the results not as destructive

[Cypress]

The Obama strategy was designed to support local ground forces in Iraq and Syria with coalition air power, advisers and training. American ground forces are not engaged in direct combat with the terror group.

“Nothing President Trump did or authorized was a fundamental game changer in the counter-ISIS strategy,” said Jennifer Cafarella, an analyst at the Institute for the Study of War.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...rve/931657001/

Trump never told us what his "secret plan for defeating ISIS in 30 days" was.

Guess what? There wasn't any secret plan. Trump was lying his fat ass off. He fundamentally just continued the Obama policy, which already had ISIS on the ropes when Trump took office.

You know what else I am sure of? When Obama was implementing this strategy a couple years ago, Republicans were claiming Obama was blowing it, and we needed to put a lot of boots on the ground - to basically engage in a second ground war in Iraq. The bottom line here is, a Republican should never, ever, under any circumstances, be allowed to lecture anyone on foreign policy, particularly Iraq.

Iraq was fucked up because of Republicans. That's just a fact, jack.

[Althea]

Yep.

Indeed, as much as Trump wailed and bellowed about Obama's strategy in Iraq, as much as he blustered that he had " a secret plan" to defeat ISIS in 30 days (a plan so secret he couldn't tell anyone), he still basically just continued the main outlines of the Obama strategy.

You know what happens to people at any job I have had who try to take credit for the accomplishments, plans, and ideas of other people? They become the most despised people at work and are treated as social outcasts.

He dumped the threat of any and all blame on the generals. Obama demanded to know about every planned strike, before it happened. He wanted to assure that civilian victims would be minimized, as ISIS tends to use innocents as shields.

[dukkha]

American ground forces are not engaged in direct combat with the terror group.

incorrect

Obama orders US special forces to 'assist' fight against Isis in Syria
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ial-operations

U.S. Special Operations Forces ‘advisors’ along with Iraqi Special Forces retake Mosul airport SOFREP Original Content

By Derek Gannon 02.24.2017
https://sofrep.com/75637/u-s-special...mosul-airport/
he government of Iraq along with the spokesperson for the U.S.-led Combined Joint Task Force – Operation Inherent Resolve (CJTF-OIR) confirmed on late Thursday that elements of the Iraqi Special Forces with U.S. Special Forces ‘advisors’ in direct support of the specialized Iraqi unit have retaken large portions of the Mosul International Airport from Islamic State fighters, which have been entrenched within the airport since 2014. Supported by U.S. close air support the coalition of Iraqi Rapid Reaction forces, federal police, and elements of the U.S. ‘Green Beret’ trained and advised Iraqi Counter Terrorism Force (ICTF) executed a ‘three-pronged attack’ against ISIS strongholds along three different fronts around the Mosul airport.

[Cypress]

He dumped the threat of any and all blame on the generals. Obama demanded to know about every planned strike, before it happened. He wanted to assure that civilian victims would be minimized, as ISIS tends to use innocents as shields.

Right, the "But Trump allowed more airstrikes" argument is flaccid, hollow, and only speaks to tactical changes at the field level. Not a wholesale rejection, or even modification of the Obama strategy.

I have no problem - zero, zilch - with Obama trying to limit civilian casualties, and proceeding with deliberation and moderation. . I am pretty sure Trump ended up killing more civilians.

[dukkha]

Trump never told us what his "secret plan for defeating ISIS in 30 days" was.

Guess what? There wasn't any secret plan. Trump was lying his fat ass off. He fundamentally just continued the Obama policy, which already had ISIS on the ropes when Trump took office.

You know what else I am sure of? When Obama was implementing this strategy a couple years ago, Republicans were claiming Obama was blowing it, and we needed to put a lot of boots on the ground - to basically engage in a second ground war in Iraq. The bottom line here is, a Republican should never, ever, under any circumstances, be allowed to lecture anyone on foreign policy, particularly Iraq.

Iraq was fucked up because of Republicans. That's just a fact, jack.

No question Iraq was a Republican SNAFU.
But battlefield autonomy and integration of Special forces into the coalition did help.

I do not see why you need be so partisan on this. Obama finally got the right ( and only available strategy)
Trump's battlefield autonomy helped wrap up Mosul and Raqqa more quickly.

( this meme of civilian casualties is absurd -urban warfare always produces more)

In the end though Iran could have fulfilled the role we played -
and you might ask how Iran suddenly got to be such a regional powerhouse in the Levant.

[Cancel 2020.1]

Trump had nothing to do w/ Mosul. That plan was already in place, and the battle was already on when he took office.

In fact, he tried to undermine the effort during the campaign, when he tweeted that it was a "total disaster" - even though it was going very well and forces were ahead of schedule.

[dukkha]

Military Under Trump 'More Aggressive' in Fight Against ISIS, U.S. Commander Says

http://time.com/4926525/stephen-town...resolve-mosul/

As we got deeper into the dense urban part of Mosul, that’s when civilian casualties became a greater concern. As we saw troops on the frontlines coming to a stalemate, the casualties on both sides went up, the damage of the infrastructure went up, and civilian casualties went up. Just think about it — if you have two sides that sit for three days flinging high-explosive ordnance at each other across a street, there’s just going to be a lot of destruction and a lot of casualties.

[Cancel 2020.1]

Military Under Trump 'More Aggressive' in Fight Against ISIS, U.S. Commander Says

http://time.com/4926525/stephen-town...resolve-mosul/

As we got deeper into the dense urban part of Mosul, that’s when civilian casualties became a greater concern. As we saw troops on the frontlines coming to a stalemate, the casualties on both sides went up, the damage of the infrastructure went up, and civilian casualties went up. Just think about it — if you have two sides that sit for three days flinging high-explosive ordnance at each other across a street, there’s just going to be a lot of destruction and a lot of casualties.

LOL

You need to read that article again. The benefits of that decision that he's praising are mainly post-Mosul.

Man, you just want to believe anything.

[dukkha]

LOL

You need to read that article again. The benefits of that decision that he's praising are mainly post-Mosul.

Man, you just want to believe anything.

idiot. Besides "post-Mosul is Raqqa.
++


n the accelerated process that was in al-Jadida, we had a battlefield emergency going on there and we had to strike quickly. The enemy was attacking our Iraqi partners there that day … and so the strike on this one position was part of the defense of their forward line of troops. We also had some bad weather that had precluded our ability to stare at that target for any extended period of time. In those cases we trust our battlefield commanders, and advisors, and our partners forward, and if they need the fire then we provide it. The process unfolds in real time and we do the best that we can.

President Trump said in April that he gave the military what he called “total authorization” over important decisions involving the use of force. Did that have any effect on how the battles unfolded, particularly in Mosul?

I think there have been. But, look, I am very appreciative of having military and civilian leaders who don’t want to control every decision we make and don’t demand minute by minute reports on what we’re doing here. I think we’re well supported. We have the authority we need and we are well supported by our military and our civilian chain of command. I think that’s what the American people want. They want to trust their military leaders. They trust our armed forces; give them a job to do, give them the tools to do it, and then get out of the way and let them do it.

I can’t say that any one of those—any increases of authority—have caused us to change the way we do business significantly, but it has freed us up a bit to prosecute the war in a more aggressive manner,

[Cancel 2020.1]

I do not see why you need be so partisan on this. Obama finally got the right ( and only available strategy)
Trump's battlefield autonomy helped wrap up Mosul and Raqqa more quickly.
.

You said this definitively. Trump's action was right near the end of Mosul, and all you have is a guy say it "may" have helped.

You are fake news.

[Cancel 2020.1]

And again - with troops on the ground, in harm's way, Trump tweeted the Mosul (which was going very well) was a "total disaster."

[dukkha]

You said this definitively. Trump's action was right near the end of Mosul, and all you have is a guy say it "may" have helped.

You are fake news.

LOL.. The guy is in combat - he critiques Obama as follows-

"I am very appreciative of having military and civilian leaders who don’t want to control every decision we make and don’t demand minute by minute reports on what we’re doing here."

He shows generally how battlefield autonomy is needed, and he gives an example of where it was used.

Then you come along like a WH lawyer under Obama and demand proof that it was needed!

How about Raqqa? should we go there?
you wind up in the most stupid partisan debates over manifest reality that battlefield autonomy is superior,
and wanted by the military