You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Iraq
US Begins Expanded Air Strikes On IS In Iraq, Congress Works On Syrian Rebel Training
2014-09-16
[IsraelTimes] US officials said Monday the United States has taken the first step in its planned expanded fight against Islamic State Death Eaters, going to the aid of Iraqi security forces near Baghdad who were being attacked by enemy fighters.

The US Central Command said it conducted two Arclight airstrikes Sunday and Monday in support of the Iraqi forces near Sinjar and southwest of Baghdad.

The strikes represent the newly broadened mission authorized by President Barack Obama
Posted by:trailing wife

#10  Is this "training" to put local "boots on the ground" the same training that was given to Libyan militias so those "local boots on the ground" could protect the consulate in Benghazi?

It wasn't "local militias." It was one militia: Ansar al Sharia. I suspect they were picked because the late ambassador Stevens had relatively good relations with them during the initial groundwork and run-up to overthrowing Ghadaffi.

As for "boots on the ground," that usually refers to military personnel. If Ansar al Sharia was trained, it was done as a facility-security team, under the auspices of the UK's Blue Mountain Group (BMG) as part of a Department of State contract. Security training, not combat training. State-contracted BMG, not DOD or DOD-contracted.

Let's keep the two separate for now, shall we? They may (and likely will) both end up being book-ended Charlie-Foxtrots, but at this point, the only resemblance is the "politics."
Posted by: Pappy   2014-09-16 15:46  

#9  Next-gen Taliban?
Posted by: gorb   2014-09-16 14:47  

#8  I thought that rebels in Syria were Sunni who truned into ISIS. So who the heck are we training in Syria?
Posted by: rjschwarz   2014-09-16 14:46  

#7  It seems the objectives of this operation are:

- Keep the hard left from bolting the Donk party

- Prevent a complete collapse of Iraq

- Pretend this is all in the service of a rainbow and unicorn Islam
Posted by: lord garth   2014-09-16 13:58  

#6  Over all, he said, the war in Vietnam was a failure because the United States had the ''wrong military objective.''

Not sure what General Garner said about objectives in VietNam.

However, the goals in the current conflict do not seem clear or even articulated. With debate (which hardly ever happens anymore), they might become clearer. It certainly does not seem like Obama is engaged in his Presidency.
Posted by: JohnQC   2014-09-16 11:47  

#5  Is this "training" to put local "boots on the ground" the same training that was given to Libyan militias so those "local boots on the ground" could protect the consulate in Benghazi?
Posted by: AlanC   2014-09-16 11:27  

#4  Retired General Jay Garner was on one of the talk shows this week end and he opined that our mistake was not keeping the Iraqi Army in one piece after the fall of Saddam. Garner claims the de-Baathification [the process of removing the members and influence of the Ba'ath Party from public office in Iraq following the US-led invasion of 2003] was not the original plan.

The Bush Administration selected Lieutenant General Jay Garner to lead the Coalition Provisional Authority (an intermediary government) in an attempt to rid Iraq of the chaos and anarchy that consumed the area. Garner's plan was to choose government officials from the former Iraqi regime to help lead the country. I suspect his [Garner's] objections to the de-Baath process and his efforts at helping the Kurds, led to his removal and replacement by the odious Paul Bremer, former Managing Director of Kissinger and Associates. Little more need be said.

General Garner entered the military as a United States Marine and later enlisted in the Army. Following his commissioning, he served two tours in Vietnam, first in 1967-68 as an infantry adviser in the central highlands, and as a district senior adviser in 1971-72 in the strategic hamlet program, which involved relocating Vietnamese in remote villages into areas heavily defended by American forces, he said. Over all, he said, the war in Vietnam was a failure because the United States had the ''wrong military objective.''

In the above photo he is shown wearing a Montagnard tribal Bracelet on his right wrist. I suspect he knows a bit about tribal politics and ethnic histories, not that that would matter to the Kissinger and Associates or the folks circling the drain in and around Foggy Bottom.
Posted by: Besoeker   2014-09-16 11:12  

#3  Bomb ISIS in Iraq, train them in Syria: is this, like, makes sense under dialectical materialism?
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2014-09-16 10:57  

#2  According to a friend of mine that's been over there several times, most of the problems that occurred with Iraqi troops deserting happened because their politically appointed officers fled, leaving a leadership vacuum. With decent leadership, the Iraqi soldier will fight very well. Unfortunately, only about one in a thousand of their officer corps is as dependable.
Posted by: Old Patriot   2014-09-16 10:38  

#1  The Obama administration says the training operation is needed to establish credible, local ground forces to accompany air strikes against the militants who have conquered large parts of Iraq and Syria

1. Training efforts do not seem to have been particularly effective with the Iraqis as they bugged out when confronted with ISIS forces.
2. If the training mission's real intent is to develop intelligence on the ground, that could be a good thing.
3. The problem of "instant jihad" by those being trained has been a problem for past training missions.
Posted by: JohnQC   2014-09-16 09:11  

00:00