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
Joint Chiefs Chairman says U.S. blindsided by fall of Mosul
2015-05-26
Outgoing Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey admits in a new interview that the U.S. military had done no contingency planning to prepare for the fall of Mosul when Islamic terrorists swept into Iraq's second-largest city last June and seized control.

"Well, no, there were not," Dempsey replies in the interview with Frontline's Martin Smith when asked if there were any contingency plans inside the Pentagon for how to respond if Mosul were to fall to terrorists from the Islamic State (or ISIL, as the group is sometimes called.)

"So, look, there were several things that surprised us about ISIL," Dempsey adds. "The degree to which they were able to form their own coalition, both inside of Syria -- and inside of northwestern Iraq; the military capability that they exhibited -- the collapse of the Iraq Security Forces. Yeah, in those initial days, there were a few surprises."

Dempsey's frank comments would appear to raise fresh questions about the performance of U.S. intelligence agencies in tracking the rise of IS as well the state of planning inside the Obama administration as it continues to grapple with a war against the Islamic State terrorists.

John Maguire, a former senior CIA officer in Iraq, called Dempsey's remarks "stunning" and described his admission of the failure to do any planning as comparable to the intelligence failures prior to the Sept. 11 terror attacks. He noted that Islamic State terrorists had been on the march inside Iraq for months before Mosul was attacked and that IS had already seized huge swaths of territory, including the city of Fallajuh, the previous January.

"Good lord, he should resign," Maguire told Yahoo News, when read a transcript of Dempsey's comments for the Frontline show, "Obama at War," which airs Tuesday night on PBS.

"The highest ranking military officer in the country is surprised by an issue that has been percolating for over a year?" said Maguire, who now serves as an advisor to the Kurdish forces battling the Islamic State. "That is breathtaking. Where in hell is the Central Intelligence Agency? We've got a $75 billion intelligence budget. There is no excuse for this."

Dempsey is not the first senior official to acknowledge that U.S. intelligence officials and the White House itself missed the ferocity of IS's advance. President Obama, in an interview with the New Yorker in January, 2014, referred to IS as the "jayvee," as in a junior varsity athletic team. And Director of National Intelligence James Clapper acknowledged last September that U.S. intelligence officials underestimated" IS and the ability of the Iraqi Army to fight back against the terrorists.

"I didn't see the collapse of the Iraq security force in the north coming," Clapper told Washington Post columnist David Ignatius in a Sept. 18, 2004, interview. "I didn't see that."

But Dempsey's remarks would appear to take the issue to a new level by admitting the lack of any "worst case scenario" planning inside the Pentagon despite months of warnings from some U.S. intelligence officials that IS was advancing rapidly through northern Iraq and Syria. "ISIL probably will attempt to take territory in Iraq and Syria in 2014, as demonstrated recently in Ramadi and Fallajuh," Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn, then the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, stated in an annual "threat assessment" report to Congress on Feb. 14, 2014.

Smith, the Frontline correspondent who conducted the interview with Dempsey, said he, too, was taken aback by the general's comments, noting the Pentagon routinely does contingency planning for all sorts of scenarios. "I can't explain it," said Smith about Dempsey's comments. "We had invested how many billions in the Iraqi Army? It's something you would think they would keep an eye on. Yet they seemed entirely blindsided."

Underscoring just how blindsided officials were, are comments in "Obama at War" from another former senior Pentagon official.

"The fall of Mosul was something that we had not anticipated," Derek Chollet, the former assistant secretary of defense for international security affairs, says in the film. "And the suddenness with which that fall occurred was something that -- that was a shock. They seized everything from small arms to light-armored vehicles- to anti-aircraft weapons. When terrorists of this kind get their hands on weapons, it was a huge concern to us. I don't think we truly understood the depth of the problem until the fall of Mosul."

Today, nearly a year later, Mosul -- a city of more than one million -- remains firmly under IS control and the Iraqi government, working closely with the U.S. military, has pushed back plans to retake the city.

The Frontline film reviews the Obama White House's efforts to grapple with the mounting crisis in Iraq and Syria during a time it was attempting to withdraw U.S. troops from the region.

In another part of his interview with Smith, Dempsey describes how the Pentagon was "on the trigger," ready to launch military action against the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in 2013 after U.S. officials had concluded he had launched a sarin gas attack against a rebel holdout in a suburb of Damascus, thereby crossing a "red line" that the president had publicly said he would not permit.

The consensus was that the Pentagon would launch strikes in Syria on Saturday, Aug. 31, Smith reports in the film.

"Our finger was on the trigger," Dempsey says in the film. "We had gone through the targeting plans and the targeting solutions. The crews were alerted. And so we had everything in place and we were just waiting -- for instructions to proceed."

But then after the British House of Commons voted not to support the action, Obama began to pull back.

"It was a Friday night and I got a call from the president of the United States," Dempsey reccalls. "And he said to me, 'I am considering an alternative course of action.' And he wanted me, overnight, to consider whether a delay would, in any way, affect our ability to be effective with our military options."
Posted by:gorb

#25  No, do tell Rob.
Posted by: Shipman   2015-05-26 23:16  

#24  Guts and Glory replaced with Gays and Global Warming.
Posted by: Ebbomosh Hupemp2664    2015-05-26 22:09  

#23  To be fair, Dempsey was busy with other pressing responsibilities: https://youtu.be/NwWYrmjqkbM

I mean - is that intimidating to the bad guys, or what???
Posted by: Lone Ranger   2015-05-26 21:49  

#22  
Or Thomas Dolby maybe


You know the connection between "She Blinded Me With Science" and the Green Berets?
Posted by: Rob Crawford   2015-05-26 20:41  

#21  As for GUAM-WESTPAC, ETC...

* FREEREPUBLIC > [Telegraph.UK] US-CHINA WAR "INEVITABLE" UNLESS WASHINGTON DROPS DEMANDS OVER SOUTH CHINA SEA.

Earlier this week ...

* RELATED SAME > CHINA STATE PAPER [Global Times] WARNS OF WAR IN SCS UNLESS US BACKS DOWN.

* DEFENCE.PK/FORUMS > US WARNS "NEXT STEP" COULD BE TO [militarily] TEST BEIJING'S TERRITORIAL CLAIMS IN SOUTH CHINA SEA.

* SAME > US HAS DENIED CHINA'S SOVEREIGNTY OVER SPRATLYS AND PARACEL ISLANDS, CHINA [+ Asia?] MAY FACE 2-3 FRONT WAR.

* MANILA TIMES > US: NO STOPPING SPY FLIGHTS [Air + Sea Patrols] ON SOUTH CHINA SEA RECCE.

* GLOBALNATION.PH > AQUINO: PH WILL NOT YIELD TO CHINA'S AIRSPACE CLAIMS, in disputed SCS = Sea Territories.

* WORLD MILITARY FORUM > CHINA HITS BACK AT US PATROLS IN SOUTH CHINA SEA WID PLAAF H-6K BOMBER INCURSIONS INSIDE JAPAN'S SOVEREIGN MIYAKO STRAIT. CHINA REMAINS LIKELY TO STRIKE/ATTACK ANY + ALL MAJOR US BASES IN PACIFIC IN CASE OF US-CHINA SOUTH CHINA SEA WAR.

GUAM + CNMI is at the other end of China + PLA's straight-line, "Strategic Direction/Route of Attack" thru SCS + Northern Philippines into WESTPAC.

IFF SYRIA + IRAQ FACE THE SPECTER/PROPECT OF PARTITION, IN SUPPORT OF THE GLOBIE AGENDA ALA IRAN, SO ALSO CAN THE PHILIPPINES + MARIANAS, ETC. IN SUPPORT OF THE GLOBIES' AGENDA ALA CHINA.

Iff the US can sink Guam + other Paxcific isles one day in order to deny to China or Nuclear Islam, etc. GLOBIE CO-SUPERPOWER "PARITY" + "GREAT GAME" SEZZES THE US ITSELF, OR LARGE PARTS OF SAME, CAN ALSO BE SUNK.

AREN'T MAINSTREAM AMERICA = AMERIKA GLAD OR HAPPY WE WERE ASKED TO VOTE FOR ALL THE ABOVE ...

Oh wait, we didn't vote ...

OOOOOOOOPPPPPSSSSSIES!
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2015-05-26 20:33  

#20  "US Blindsided .." > I doubt it, as Anti-US US OWG Globalist POTUS Obama + aligned are PCorrectly-Deniably helping IRAN [+ Putin Russia + China, etc.] expand their "Spheres of Influence".

Iff the fall of Mosul helps IRAN, E-T-A-L rise to MilPol/Geopol "Parity" wid the US as a "US-Style" OWG Globalist Co-Superpower, then the Bammer + Globies have succeeded.

* FYI FREEREPUBLIC > [New American] US INTEL: OBAMA COALITION SUPPORTED [preferred] ISLAMIC STATE IN SYRIA.

* CNN AM > GUEST ANALYSTS = denoted that CHINA IS MOVING = EVOLVING FROM A HISTORICAL OR TRADIONAL LAND-BASED, CONTINENTAL, + REGIONAL POWER, TO BEINGA GLOBAL NAVAL + MARITIME POWER.

* IIRC "MANILA BULLETIN" COMMENTARY = CHINA IS A [aggressive] RISING POWER, SEEKING TO INCREASE ITS [Mahanist?] GEOPOL INFLUENCE AROUND THE WORLD, WHEREAS THE US IS A [established]"STATUS QUO" POWER THAT SEES ITSELF AS A REFEREE.

-------------------

* Lest we fergit, OWG GLOBALISM = THE "TIP-OF-THE-SPEAR-IN-SETTING-UP-ANTI-US-OWG-NWO" US IS ULTIMATELY TO BE JUST ONE OF SEVERAL, MANY, OR MULTIPLE "PAR", "CO-SUPERPOWERS" IN THE WORLD.

Just as there is no conclusive evidence that the Global Secular Lefts can or will control the Global Jihad + Global Jihadists, THERE IS NO CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE THAT ANY FUTURE, EX-"SOLE" SUPERPOWER-NOW-OWG-CO-SUPERPOWER USoAMERIKA CAN CONTROL OR DOMINATE ITS FELLOW CO-SUPERPOWER SIBLINGS + VARIOUS WANNABES.

UNTIL THEY DO, THE RISK OR SCENARIO IS THERE THAT ALL THE US, WESTERN GLOBIES ARE ACCOMPLISHING IS HELPING THOSE ENEMIES OR PROTAGONISTS THAT COULD OR WILL DESTROY THEM GET STRONGER.

> The US is helping IRAN to nuclearize, despite recogniz the risk that the Islamic World + espec the Hard Boyz may get access to the NucBomb Techs.
> The US is helping Iran + Russia + China, Other? to expand their spheres of influences to the detriment of US Regional Allies + US Strategic Interests.

WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG!?

Posted by: JosephMendiola   2015-05-26 20:10  

#19  Exactly right OS. It still pains me to think what a thrashing an Army aviation elements at FOB Speicher or Balad could have handed ISIS recently.
Posted by: Besoeker   2015-05-26 17:38  

#18  Actually the fact that we are all volunteers makes the failures even more aggravating - we *want* to fight the good fight.
Posted by: OldSpook   2015-05-26 17:06  

#17  Repeat of Vietnam and the fall of Saigon - the liberal 'glory days'

Can't have it without draft, CF.
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2015-05-26 16:10  

#16  History began when obama took office.

Except for that which is BOOSH'es fault!

I hear you Besoeker. Liberals don't have any 'victories' or 'good works' they can lay claim to so they resort themselves with tearing everything else down to their level.

It would be pathetic if it weren't for all the innocents killed in the process.
Posted by: CrazyFool   2015-05-26 16:02  

#15  "Did anybody in power learn anything from our previous history?"

History began when obama took office.
Posted by: newc   2015-05-26 15:38  

#14  Well CF, it was a pub war.... right? Can't stumble around sustaining pub efforts, past or present, now can we ?
Posted by: Besoeker   2015-05-26 15:20  

#13  Did anybody in power learn anything from our previous history?

Of course they did - the administration and Democrats (and not a few Republicans) have been trying to repeat that segment of history ever since the war started.

This makes perfect sense once you consider what the desired outcome is. (Hint: Repeat of Vietnam and the fall of Saigon - the liberal 'glory days'). Just ask 'the war is lost' Reid and company.
Posted by: CrazyFool   2015-05-26 15:15  

#12  Promoting commanders for complaisance & compliance instead of competence and courage leads to credulity, corruption, and collapse.

-- Oldspook's rule of Military C's.
Posted by: OldSpook   2015-05-26 14:43  

#11  I read a book once how the US was surprised at how quickly South Vietnam collapsed. Did anybody in power learn anything from our previous history?
Posted by: rjschwarz   2015-05-26 14:34  

#10  Must have misplaced that particular PowerPoint slide.
Posted by: Mullah Richard   2015-05-26 14:30  

#9  They were too busy watching me read Rantburg.
Posted by: KBK   2015-05-26 14:23  

#8   admits in a new interview that the U.S. military had done no contingency planning to prepare for the fall of Mosul

Wouldn't have taken much planning - a few hundred surplus artillery pieces and plenty of shells pre-positioned in Irbil might have made a big difference.
Posted by: Glenmore   2015-05-26 13:58  

#7  a) blindsided
b) just not paying attention
c) don't really care anyway
d) golf!
e) all of the above
Posted by: Chick Glemp4272   2015-05-26 13:58  

#6  I'll bet they have the War on Global Warming down pat...
Posted by: Pappy   2015-05-26 13:55  

#5  Ok, so let's whiteboard all the possible downsides shall we? Not enuf space on a standard whiteboard? Ok, butcher paper then, lots of it, a dozen black markers, and 5 rolls of 90 mph tape. Someone order sandwiches and Pepsi. We'll likely be here most of the day.
Posted by: Besoeker   2015-05-26 13:17  

#4  But Dempsey's remarks would appear to take the issue to a new level by admitting the lack of any "worst case scenario" planning inside the Pentagon despite months of warnings from some U.S. intelligence officials that IS was advancing rapidly through northern Iraq and Syria.

Who has time for "worst case scenario's" or war gaming. We've got to get female sojurs through Ranger school dimmit !

Besides, the Champ doesn't want bad news, or a General Petraeus re-hash regarding the risks of a total U.S. pull-out of Iraq.
Posted by: Besoeker   2015-05-26 13:10  

#3  What's that word again? Ah yes, unexpected.

Bunch of Yes Men and sycophants leads to a lot of 'unexpected'.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2015-05-26 13:09  

#2  Or Thomas Dolby maybe
Posted by: Shipman   2015-05-26 13:04  

#1  There are none so blind as those who will not see.

I think that's Simon and Garfunkle.
Posted by: Bobby   2015-05-26 12:55  

00:00