Comments

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.
Foto

Submit your comments on this article

Iraq

Dempsey: U.S. called in Apache helicopters to protect Baghdad airport

2014-10-13

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey has revealed that the United States had to call in Apache helicopters to protect Baghdad's airport against the Islamic State, The Washington Post reported.

"They were within 20 or 25 kilometers [of Baghdad airport] and had they overrun the Iraqi unit, it was a straight shot to the airport. So we're not going to allow that to happen; we need that airport," he said during an interview on ABC's "This Week" on Sunday.

Are the Apache guys allowed to shoot? Allowed to shoot back?

Dempsey said that "the risk of operating in a hostile environment is there, constantly," and the Apache was the "tool that was immediately available." He described the fight against the Islamic State as a "very challenging task" until the Iraqi government is able to reach out to 20 million Sunnis in Iraq and Syria.

As to the next stage of the battle, Dempsey said he believed the international coalition fighting the Islamic State could do more in Syria. He denied that there were any immediate plans to set up a no-fly zone in Syria but said there could be "circumstances in the future where that would be part of the campaign."

On the question of putting U.S. troops on the ground, Dempsey again said there were no immediate plans but it is likely "there will be circumstances" where troops would make it easier to hit Islamic State targets.

"Mosul will likely be the decisive battle in the ground campaign at some point in the future," he said. "My instinct at this point is that will require a different kind of advising and assisting because of the complexity of that fight."

Posted by:Steve White

#7 "...we need that airport"

Why's that, general? Are Blackhawks too heavy to land on roofs?

Posted by: tu3031 2014-10-13 22:38

#6 He's trying to get through November without making any news at all. Champ made it perfectly clear he isn't interested in this conflict when he used his moment addressing the UN on the heels of a massive block of released executions to stump the democratic platform and call St. Louis policemen a cadre of racists; that is other than what trends on social media. Yzidis being butched and slaved? Quick, get me some assets and a camera. It is part, IMHO, why he wants to many handles to choose to pull, like his drone strike list.

My concern with Kobani is a Kurd win will make ISJV desperate, a loss will make ISJV confident. I think Turkey is not being coy but straight showing their hand that they are not interested unless they can attack Assad forces. That means Turkey kind of needs Kobani to fall so ISJV can better east-west transit and get out of the way after the inevitable videos and subsequent call to do...something, anything. These guys are playing old school war, where rules are only for potty training. Turkey gets it corridor to Demascus, ISJV hits east on its declared target Baghdad and Kurd strongpoints, maybe even Saud, Iran gets to push west and hit the Kurds when they declare Kurdistan.

Trust me, I would love to be wrong, wake up one morning and find out we did like the French did in CAR and kick the beseigers of Kobani right in the asshole. Nothing less than anything in this area not USA gets an air stike, there to kick ass.

But that isn't going to happen. In a way, I don't want it to happen because it will not be able to do what they will need to do. Our political cards actually side closest with Turkey in this.

But hey. Expecting to see a score card any day now.

Posted by: swksvolFF 2014-10-13 16:25

#5 "Oh, S**t. They're coming down the road!"
"Hey, get some video for Utube."

the Apache was the "tool that was immediately available."

Posted by: Skidmark 2014-10-13 15:32

#4 On the question of putting U.S. troops on the ground, Dempsey again said there were no immediate plans but it is likely "there will be circumstances" where troops would make it easier to hit Islamic State targets.

Two key issues the regime does absolutely not wish to deal with:

a. ISIS prisoners of war.
b. US military personnel suffering battlefield execution by beheading.

Champ feels shat upon. He feels Bush left this crisis for him. Therefore, he's planning on leaving it for the next administration. Classic Obama logic stream.

Posted by: Besoeker 2014-10-13 12:32

#3 the Islamic State as a "very challenging task" He [Demsey] described the fight against the Islamic State as a "very challenging task" until the Iraqi government is able to reach out to 20 million Sunnis in Iraq and Syria. "My instinct at this point is that will require a different kind of advising and assisting because of the complexity of that fight."

It strikes me Dempsey is very proficient at Washington double-speak.--Talking a lot and not saying much.

Posted by: JohnQC 2014-10-13 09:27

#2 Why don't they just broadcast a speech from Obola telling the non muslim IS fighters to lay down their weapons. That is a strategy worthy of The Great Obola!!!

Posted by: Steven 2014-10-13 03:31

#1 'Hope the current/previous road kill are making room under the bus for the good General. I'd say he will be joining threm in 5...., 4 ...., 3 ...., ....

Posted by: Lone Ranger 2014-10-13 03:07

00:00