War against ISIS

[rz3300]

I think that we are well past recognizing that this is a very serious threat to our security. They seem to be growing and growing and the threat becoming more real as the days go by, without any real response from our leaders or a plan of action. It seems like we are just waiting for something to happen before we act, which might be dangerous.

 

[BLACKEAGLE]

U.S. says troops ‘needed’ to retake ISIS-held cities

Iraqi soldiers train with members of the U.S. Army 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 82nd Airborne Division, at Camp Taji, Iraq, in this U.S. Army file photo. (Reuters)

Reuters, Washington Friday, 22 January 2016

The U.S.-led coalition fighting Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) needs to take back the cities Mosul and Raqqa and will use "boots on the ground" as part of its strategy in doing so, U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter said on Friday.

"We need to destroy them in those two places, and I'd like to get on with that as soon as possible," Carter, speaking from Davos, Switzerland, said in an interview on CNBC.

He said the coalition is using raids and bombs to take control of the routes between the two cities and cut off communication between them.

"That'll essentially separate the Iraqi theater from the Syrian theater," he said.

Carter said more ground soldiers will probably be added to support those already there, but part of the strategy is also mobilizing local forces "rather than trying to substitute for them."

Last Update: Friday, 22 January 2016 KSA 18:56 - GMT 15:56
http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2016/01/22/Carter-boots-on-ground-part-of-strategy-to-fight-ISIS.html

 

[DownWithDaesh]

I think the Syrian government's troops, combined with the Kurdish armies and the airstrikes from many countires, will be enough to destroy ISIS relatively quickly. The US probably wants to put troops on the ground so they can influence the situation (because they hate Assad perhaps more than ISIS) and take credit for destroying ISIS, instead of having it look like they were outdone by Russia.

I am a bit perplexed by the idea that ISIS is a grave and immediate threat to the West. They are weak, helpless and doomed. I don't see how they could really be a successful and enduring state considering how belligerent they are; a country needs allies to survive, both militarily and economically. ISIS presumably does have allies, and that must be how they're surviving as well as they are, but these alliances are covert and therefore unreliable. For example, if the Saudis were secretly supporting ISIS, there would be no risk whatsoever if they stopped their support.

ISIS is really at the mercy of whoever is supporting them, and whoever is supporting them is the graver threat, because they can support other groups like ISIS, and the ideology behind ISIS as well. When ISIS is destroyed (hopefully soon), that will be great, but there's nothing preventing a dozen similar groups from popping up if the mentalities of the people remain the same.

 

[explorerx7]

The existence of Isis has evolved into a cause of major concern worldwide. However, we should now realise it will not be an easy task in the ousting that organisation. It has cells all over the globe and it's difficult to estimate when and where they are gonna strike; nowhere seems to be safe from their possible onslaught. Its regrettable to have to make the observation, that all the moves against them in the Middle East seems to be just containment. Air strikes alone are not going to defeat them. It would be great if someone would come up with some different type stragety to assist the ongoing prosecc...probably the introduction of some highly effective covert activities.

 

[UAE]

The existence of Isis has evolved into a cause of major concern worldwide. However, we should now realise it will not be an easy task in the ousting that organisation. It has cells all over the globe and it's difficult to estimate when and where they are gonna strike; nowhere seems to be safe from their possible onslaught. Its regrettable to have to make the observation, that all the moves against them in the Middle East seems to be just containment. Air strikes alone are not going to defeat them. It would be great if someone would come up with some different type stragety to assist the ongoing prosecc...probably the introduction of some highly effective covert activities.

Exactly to the bolded underlined part. There is no way to put an end to ISIS except by deploying ground troops. Other than that is just a waste of time and resources.

 

[Scorpion]

I think the Syrian government's troops, combined with the Kurdish armies and the airstrikes from many countires, will be enough to destroy ISIS relatively quickly. The US probably wants to put troops on the ground so they can influence the situation (because they hate Assad perhaps more than ISIS) and take credit for destroying ISIS, instead of having it look like they were outdone by Russia.

I am a bit perplexed by the idea that ISIS is a grave and immediate threat to the West. They are weak, helpless and doomed. I don't see how they could really be a successful and enduring state considering how belligerent they are; a country needs allies to survive, both militarily and economically. ISIS presumably does have allies, and that must be how they're surviving as well as they are, but these alliances are covert and therefore unreliable. For example, if the Saudis were secretly supporting ISIS, there would be no risk whatsoever if they stopped their support.

ISIS is really at the mercy of whoever is supporting them, and whoever is supporting them is the graver threat, because they can support other groups like ISIS, and the ideology behind ISIS as well. When ISIS is destroyed (hopefully soon), that will be great, but there's nothing preventing a dozen similar groups from popping up if the mentalities of the people remain the same.

You made me lol. Assad sole enemy is the Syrian rebels not ISIS. In fact ISIS control oil in Syria; Assad buy oil and ISIS gets cash in return where the money is used to buy arms. Iraq itself has accused Assad of supporting and financing ISIS. Who let ISIS inside Syria and Iraq in the first place? JSYK that ISIS leader Al-Baghdadi was in U.S prison before was let go.

 

[Redheart]

ISIS is really at the mercy of whoever is supporting them, and whoever is supporting them is the graver threat, because they can support other groups like ISIS, and the ideology behind ISIS as well

Unlike many other terrorist organizations that depend on getting funds from a few wealthy people and nations such as Iran which don't mind helping terrorists, ISIS was financially independent. They made money from oil, extortion, selling human organs, selling sex slaves, etc. When they no longer make any money from oil, that's when they might need financial aid from terror-financiers.

 

[DownWithDaesh]

You made me lol. Assad sole enemy is the Syrian rebels not ISIS. In fact ISIS control oil in Syria; Assad buy oil and ISIS gets cash in return where the money is used to buy arms. Iraq itself has accused Assad of supporting and financing ISIS. Who let ISIS inside Syria and Iraq in the first place? JSYK that ISIS leader Al-Baghdadi was in U.S prison before was let go.

I think ISIS let themselves in. ISIS are Syrian rebels (mixed with foreign fighters, like many groups in Syria), and that's why Assad is fighting them. I doubt that he would have so much support if he were insane enough to support ISIS.

Anyways, it is probably futile disputing these things... You get a drastically different picture of the situation depending on what news you trust.

 

[Scorpion]

I think ISIS let themselves in. ISIS are Syrian rebels (mixed with foreign fighters, like many groups in Syria), and that's why Assad is fighting them. I doubt that he would have so much support if he were insane enough to support ISIS.

Anyways, it is probably futile disputing these things... You get a drastically different picture of the situation depending on what news you trust.

ISIS isn't Syrian rebels rather Iraqi ex baathists mixed with foreign fighters. Second, Assad has no support except from Iran and Russia. The whole intl community consider him a terrorist and an illegitimate leader along with his current gov.

 

[DownWithDaesh]

ISIS isn't Syrian rebels rather Iraqi ex baathists mixed with foreign fighters. Second, Assad has no support except from Iran and Russia. The whole intl community consider him a terrorist and an illegitimate leader along with his current gov.

He also has support from China. And it's plausible that other countries are supporting Assad covertly, because if they did it openly it would make them look bad or get them on the bad side of countries they want to be on good terms with. Anyways, he has plenty of support from the Syrians who are being liberated and protected from ISIS and other fanatics by the Syrian army.

 

[Scorpion]

He also has support from China. And it's plausible that other countries are supporting Assad covertly, because if they did it openly it would make them look bad or get them on the bad side of countries they want to be on good terms with. Anyways, he has plenty of support from the Syrians who are being liberated and protected from ISIS and other fanatics by the Syrian army.

I wouldn't want to lump all anti Assad all together in one basket. ISIS has different political approach to the situation in Iraq and Syria. In fact ISIS are in Iraq and only small minority are in Syria who were let in by Assad to fight the rebels. ISIS have been fought against by the rebels since the day they sat foot in Syria. They Syrian opposition and their military wing who are fighting both Assad and ISIS are recognized by almost all world countries except Russia, Iran, China and few others and have been participating in all international gathering e.g Geneva meeting to speed up implementation of the UN resolution 2254.

 

[Redheart]

Ukraine intends to join the fight against ISIS but since they don't like Russians that much complications might ensue . . .

Ukraine plans to join fight against Isis means troops could come up against Russian forces in Syria | Europe | News | The Independent
Ukraine’s battle-hardened armed forces would relish such an opportunity. Ukraine has four special-forces regiments and a further unit of its Defence Intelligence Department – a total of 7,000 troops. It also has highly capable airborne troops, part of a mobilised army numbering 200,000, of which 40,000 are always on the country’s eastern front facing pro-Russian rebels.

In terms of Russian language skills and combating Russian tactics, Ukrainians are world leaders. However, any troop deployment into Syria would be controversial in Kiev, and require a parliamentary vote, with some arguing that Ukraine needs to focus on the rebels who pose a continuing threat in its east, despite the current military deadlock. It might also prove controversial in Europe.

A senior military source in Ukraine’s capital said: “I would see a lot of hand wringing at Nato in Brussels.”

 

[Jaeger]

Pentagon lays out plan to take back Mosul, Raqqa from ISIS
Defense Secretary Ash Carter laid out broad plans Wednesday to defeat Islamic State militants and retake the group's key power centers in Iraq and Syria. And he announced that a special commando force has now arrived in Iraq.

Speaking to troops from the 101st Airborne Division who will soon deploy to Iraq, Carter also said he would meet in Paris next week with his defense counterparts, mainly from Europe, and will challenge them to bring more capabilities to the fight.

He said he will be meeting with defense leaders from France, Australia, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, and "will not hesitate to engage and challenge" them to get them to do more.

"Each of these nations has a significant stake in completing the destruction of this evil organization, and we must include all of the capabilities they can bring to the field," he said.






Some contributions the U.S. has requested already are special operations forces, fighter jet and reconnaissance aircraft, weapons and munitions, training and other combat support.

Carter's broader message signaled the completion of a military plan to help Iraqi and Kurdish peshmerga forces retake Mosul in northern Iraq and to assist the Syrian moderate forces oust Islamic State militants from their headquarters in Raqqa.

He described operations that would send Iraqi forces from the south and peshmerga forces from the north to encircle and cut off Mosul. But he warned that taking it back will not be quick or easy, and he offered no timelines.

Carter announced in December that the U.S. would deploy about 200 special operations forces to Iraq to better capitalize on intelligence and put more pressure on the enemy.

"The specialized expeditionary targeting force I announced in December is now in place and is preparing to work with the Iraqis to begin going after ISIL's fighters and commanders, killing or capturing them wherever we find them, along with other key targets," Carter said, using an acronym for Islamic State.

His speech offered an upbeat assessment of the anti-IS campaign, saying that coalition-backed forces, supported by the airstrikes, are taking back territory and going after the groups finances. This week airstrikes hit an Islamic State cash center in Mosul.

Military leaders have said that the militants have lost 40 percent of the territory they once held in Iraq, and 20 percent of their territory in Syria. The effort has been aided by strong support from Kurdish troops in northern Iraq, as the U.S. worked to build up Iraqi Army forces.

The Iraqi forces struggled for months to retake Ramadi, but backed by airstrikes and other logistical support they were finally able to drive IS from the city last month.

His remarks came a day after President Obama's State of the Union speech, expanding on the message that the U.S. must build and work with local forces in Iraq and Syria to have lasting success. He said the U.S. must not "Americanize" the conflicts because that would allow militants to accuse the West of occupying the country.

The ongoing U.S. effort, however, has come under fire from members of Congress and critics who say it's a failed strategy that isn't aggressive enough and should involve a more robust military presence to both defeat IS, and protect fleeing refugees, particularly along the Turkey and Syria border.

About 500 troops from the 101st Airborne headquarters group will deploy at the end of February. About 1,300 members of the 2nd Brigade Combat Team will deploy to Iraq in late spring.

The brigade will be training Iraqi and Kurdish forces.

 

[Falcon29]

Pentagon lays out plan to take back Mosul, Raqqa from ISIS
Defense Secretary Ash Carter laid out broad plans Wednesday to defeat Islamic State militants and retake the group's key power centers in Iraq and Syria. And he announced that a special commando force has now arrived in Iraq.

Speaking to troops from the 101st Airborne Division who will soon deploy to Iraq, Carter also said he would meet in Paris next week with his defense counterparts, mainly from Europe, and will challenge them to bring more capabilities to the fight.

He said he will be meeting with defense leaders from France, Australia, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, and "will not hesitate to engage and challenge" them to get them to do more.

"Each of these nations has a significant stake in completing the destruction of this evil organization, and we must include all of the capabilities they can bring to the field," he said.






Some contributions the U.S. has requested already are special operations forces, fighter jet and reconnaissance aircraft, weapons and munitions, training and other combat support.

Carter's broader message signaled the completion of a military plan to help Iraqi and Kurdish peshmerga forces retake Mosul in northern Iraq and to assist the Syrian moderate forces oust Islamic State militants from their headquarters in Raqqa.

He described operations that would send Iraqi forces from the south and peshmerga forces from the north to encircle and cut off Mosul. But he warned that taking it back will not be quick or easy, and he offered no timelines.

Carter announced in December that the U.S. would deploy about 200 special operations forces to Iraq to better capitalize on intelligence and put more pressure on the enemy.

"The specialized expeditionary targeting force I announced in December is now in place and is preparing to work with the Iraqis to begin going after ISIL's fighters and commanders, killing or capturing them wherever we find them, along with other key targets," Carter said, using an acronym for Islamic State.

His speech offered an upbeat assessment of the anti-IS campaign, saying that coalition-backed forces, supported by the airstrikes, are taking back territory and going after the groups finances. This week airstrikes hit an Islamic State cash center in Mosul.

Military leaders have said that the militants have lost 40 percent of the territory they once held in Iraq, and 20 percent of their territory in Syria. The effort has been aided by strong support from Kurdish troops in northern Iraq, as the U.S. worked to build up Iraqi Army forces.

The Iraqi forces struggled for months to retake Ramadi, but backed by airstrikes and other logistical support they were finally able to drive IS from the city last month.

His remarks came a day after President Obama's State of the Union speech, expanding on the message that the U.S. must build and work with local forces in Iraq and Syria to have lasting success. He said the U.S. must not "Americanize" the conflicts because that would allow militants to accuse the West of occupying the country.

The ongoing U.S. effort, however, has come under fire from members of Congress and critics who say it's a failed strategy that isn't aggressive enough and should involve a more robust military presence to both defeat IS, and protect fleeing refugees, particularly along the Turkey and Syria border.

About 500 troops from the 101st Airborne headquarters group will deploy at the end of February. About 1,300 members of the 2nd Brigade Combat Team will deploy to Iraq in late spring.

The brigade will be training Iraqi and Kurdish forces.

Syrian government can retake Raqqa on it's own, Raqqa doesn't belong to Kurds or CIA trained mercenaries.

 

[Jaeger]

Syrian government can retake Raqqa on it's own, Raqqa doesn't belong to Kurds or CIA trained mercenaries.

maybe not by themselves, but they could take Raqqa with the help of the Russian airstrikes.