Under Trump, gains against ISIS have ‘dramatically accelerated’

Covfefe said:
There is something for which we can give him credit.

https://www.thenation.com/article/t...-casualties-dont-matter-in-the-war-on-terror/
Click to expand...
it just says "white phosphorus.." I seem to recall similar claims by Amnesty before that went nowhere,
but if you wanna look that up and get back to us, i'll look at it.

Mosul/Fallujah/Iraqi and Syrian cities was literally house to house fighting. The same with Sirte in Libya.
ISIS doesn't surrender.
So this concept of annihilation sounds gruesome -and it is-but would you want to advance house by house if it wasn't used?

ISIS isn't going to give up, it has to be rooted out. All the players use the same technique
 
According to Amnesty’s analysis, the white phosphorus artillery projectiles in the footage are most likely US-made 155mm M825A1s. The US-led coalition has confirmed its recent use of white phosphorous in the Iraqi city of Mosul but has yet to confirm white phosphorous use in Raqqa. In Mosul, the coalition claimed it used white phosphorous to create a smokescreen to assist civilians in their escape from areas of the city under the control of the Islamic State armed group. Fighting has been intensifying in Raqqa as Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) backed by the US-led coalition are pushing to gain control the city from ISIS. Hundreds of thousands of civilians remain trapped in and around Raqqa and Amnesty is monitoring the conduct of all parties to the conflict in the city.
Click to expand...
US led coalition is not the US itself..
 
anatta said:
it just says "white phosphorus.." I seem to recall similar claims by Amnesty before that went nowhere,
but if you wanna look that up and get back to us, i'll look at it.

Mosul/Fallujah/Iraqi and Syrian cities was literally house to house fighting. The same with Sirte in Libya.
ISIS doesn't surrender.
So this concept of annihilation sounds gruesome -and it is-but would you want to advance house by house if it wasn't used?

ISIS isn't going to give up, it has to be rooted out. All the players use the same technique
Click to expand...
https://www.democracynow.org/2005/11/17/pentagon_reverses_position_and_admits_u
 
anatta said:
which would be different then just lobbing in shells as "the US led Coalition" is accused of in the AI report. Your link is back in 2005. the Bush war.
Click to expand...
Mattis was in charge then, he is in charge now, not too hard to make the connection and realize the charges are based in fact. If we did it before, we could do, again, especially since no one was held responsible last time
 
Wow, is this an accomplishment? Notably in the same area where Trump has delegated, nay, in fact ceded his authority to people who actually are competent to do it.
Perhaps that will be a lesson for Trump and he will recede from the rest of his duties so that there is a chance something else may be accomplished. We can only pray he quits entirely
rather than piecemeal.
 
Micawber said:
Wow, is this an accomplishment? Notably in the same area where Trump has delegated, nay, in fact ceded his authority to people who actually are competent to do it.
Perhaps that will be a lesson for Trump and he will recede from the rest of his duties so that there is a chance something else may be accomplished. We can only pray he quits entirely
rather than piecemeal.
Click to expand...
"US led coalition" for those that need repeating.
and Trump gets credit for delegating battlefield activities to the battlefield officers (gee what a concept)
 
anatta said:
"US led coalition" for those that need repeating.
and Trump gets credit for delegating battlefield activities to the battlefield officers (gee what a concept)
Click to expand...

"Shortening a rigorous policy making process in order to speed up wartime deployments is about as close to operating on auto-pilot as one can be. "

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-bl...dent-trump-before-he-puts-all-of-his-trust-in

Defense Secretary James Mattis announced Thursday that Trump had given him authority over Afghanistan troop levels, a little more than a month after the President had given him control over the number of US soldiers operating in Syria and Iraq. Mattis is expected to send some 3,000 to 5,000 additional troops to Afghanistan.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/16/politics/trump-military-troops-afghanistan-mattis/index.html

From his perspective, if he handed over decision-making authorities to military leaders, and Trump effectively removed himself from the process, then from the president’s vantage point, “they” are to blame for what went wrong, not him.

A variety of words come to mind, but “leadership” isn’t one of them.

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/trump-delegates-too-much-his-commander-chief-authority
 
Micawber said:
"Shortening a rigorous policy making process in order to speed up wartime deployments is about as close to operating on auto-pilot as one can be. "
Click to expand...
nice quote. but we're not talking "policy" - that is set by WH/generals. we're talking battlefield maneuvers.

an example would be 'what's the best way to flush out and destroy ISIS from cities?'
Commanders on the ground know the lay out (like in Mosul -do you start w/ the old or new city)
and what tactics to use.

Why in great Buddha's name would you kick this upto the WH like it was under Obama?

Defense Secretary James Mattis announced Thursday that Trump had given him authority over Afghanistan troop levels, a little more than a month after the President had given him control over the number of US soldiers operating in Syria and Iraq. Mattis is expected to send some 3,000 to 5,000 additional troops to Afghanistan.
Click to expand...
but Trump has the final say. So he has them running scenarios
He reportedly was unhappy with the low levels there now not being able to protect themselves (muchless the ANSF)- but did not want to go the Big Escalation/Deescalation route Obama tried.
* hint: GTF outta there is our best bet or just go full counterterrorism* < my comment

http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/16/politics/trump-military-troops-afghanistan-mattis/index.html

From his perspective, if he handed over decision-making authorities to military leaders, and Trump effectively removed himself from the process, then from the president’s vantage point, “they” are to blame for what went wrong, not him.

A variety of words come to mind, but “leadership” isn’t one of them.
Click to expand...
pretty much a junk/fake article.
Do you not think Trump will get them blame if he escalates and it doesn't work?

He got the blame for the Yemen raid gone bad ( rightfully so) even though it was an off the shelf leftover Obama plan
 
Cypress said:
'The strategy hasn't changed at all' — Trump's plan to defeat ISIS is the same as Obama's

http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-strategy-defeat-isis-obama-2017-7


There is nobody here who does not remember ISIS has been on the run, on the decline on the battlefield, since before the Orange Pussy Grabber took office.
Click to expand...

Though Trump has made small tactical changes to the anti-ISIS campaign, such as giving the military greater authority to call the shots on the ground,
^ what we are talking about.i t's not small if you are on the battlefield
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top