“I don’t think we are going to solve this problem in weeks. I think this is going to take some time.” Indeed. Since it has been going on for 1,400 years, and no end to it is on the horizon, that seems to be a fair statement. But Obama’s declaration of success here is, to say the least, premature.
“Obama: Air strikes have succeeded, mission continues,” The Associated Press, August 9, 2014:
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama said Saturday that airstrikes he ordered in northern Iraq have destroyed arms and equipment held by Islamic State forces whose rapid advance has surpassed U.S. intelligence estimates.
Obama warned Americans that the new campaign in Iraq “is going to be a long-term project.” He wouldn’t give a timetable for how long the U.S. military involvement would last, saying it depends on Iraq’s political efforts.
“I don’t think we are going to solve this problem in weeks,” Obama said. “I think this is going to take some time.”
The president said humanitarian efforts continue to airdrop food and water to persecuted religious minorities stranded on a mountaintop, and he said planning was underway for how to get them down.
Obama made his comments on the South Lawn of the White House Saturday, just before boarding Marine One for his summer vacation in Massachusetts.
Obama sharply rejected the premise that it was his decision to pull out from Iraq and said it was because Iraqis didn’t want U.S. troops there.
He repeated that the U.S. is not going to have us combat troops in Iraq again. “We are going to maintain that because we should have learned a lesson from our long and immensely costly incursion into Iraq,” Obama said.
The president said there’s “no doubt” the Islamic State advance on the Kurdish capital of Irbil “has been more rapid than the intelligence estimates.”
U.S. military jets launched several airstrikes Friday on isolated targets, including two mortar positions and a vehicle convoy. U.S. officials announced Friday night the second airdrop of food and water in as many days for the imperiled refugees.
shrugger says
Would this be the very same arms and equipment he was giving to them not so long ago?!?
Jay Boo says
Why is the emphasis on saying “destroyed arms and equipment”
Is Obama forbidden from warring against Muslims?
Let’s avoid those ISIS casualties lest we demoralize those taxpayer paid for ‘free Syrian Army’ beasts.
David, Thailand says
He doesn’t want IS to turn its ugly head towards the US, and Europe enjoys the same sentiment.
Unfortunately, only Western Leftists, media and leaders are unaware that once IS consolidates it will bring this Third Jihad right to our doorsteps.
IS must be killed where it began, or its the cancer will take on a civilisation that is prevented from defending itself through political correctness and abject fear.
John C. Barile says
Take out a few more U.S-built Humvees, armored vehicles, and another artillery piece or two, and it’ll be “MISSION ACCOMPLISHED.” Finally, then, it’ll all be OVER over THERE.
/sarc
Beagle says
The bright side is that the IS has been acting as a traditional maneuver force. Our military can deal with that far better than shadowy suicide bombing rings holed up in mosques and apartments. So while I have no illusions about ending jihad, the days of the IS rampaging around like the panzers in France circa 1940 could be at an end.
jihad3tracker says
Hello Beagle — Yes, a traditional maneuver force can be dealt with.
But IS now takes civilians hostage — Yazidi Christian women for sexual slavery in the current situation.
Killing their troops without doing harm to innocents placed among them is nearly impossible without U.S. or Iraqi spotters on the ground, or drones with the great good luck to reliably tell when sufficient distance exists between combatants and captives.
And they are not stupid enough to ever let that happen.
Jay Boo says
The problem though is that Obama wishes to target (arms and equipment) rather than ISIS troops which speaks loud and clear of his deep sympathies with these throat slitting child rapists thugs.
David, Thailand says
Our military might is irrelevant.
The Left are more interested to demonstrate that we hold the ‘high moral ground’ rather than actually get out there and win wars, which is why they have imposed upon us the restrictive demands of ‘ethical warfare’.
Fwit, I see nothing moral about sinking to one’s knees and sacrificing random batches of Western lives in order to hold that high moral ground.
No civilisation in the history of the world has ever attempted let alone accomplished such a dumb feat, yet our spineless and willfully ignorant leaders have gone along with that ‘progressive’ concept.
Sugarboots says
Are the rock hard biscuits ready for launch!
Well, at 10:00 Western time, President Obama was enjoying a round of gulf at Martha’s Vineyard. I hope he’s having fun.
Just for fun; some adjectives I’ve heard to describe the Prez. Lazy, childish, out of touch, arrogant . . .
Prinz Eugen says
Successful? How? In what way? Seems like a quagmire — or just more lies from the islam-supporting ape-minkey.
Is McLiar still demanding we arm these clowns? Seems the world’s governments
are all in Ringling Brothers main ring! And we are stuck with the likes of khalifa Barry, Wimp Boehner and John McLiar! Where is lyin’ Lois when we need leaderless ship?
Is anyone awake in DC?
MyFather says
Supporting same ISIS in Syria and striking them in Iraq—–What a hippocracy; a real face of US and allies.
Bradamante says
“Since it has been going on for 1,400 years, and no end to it is on the horizon, that seems to be a fair statement.”
There are times when Robert Spencer makes me laugh out loud.
kangi_nunpa says
I generally don’t pick at grammar and misspellings because I know what you mean, MyFather, but yours was just too good.
‘Hypocrisy’ is what you were going for. Hippocracy is ‘rule by horses,’ which is just kind of awesome.
Being ruled by horses would probably be better than what we’ve got.
Angemon says
Erm, didn’t he campaign to get US troops out of Iraq? And didn’t he take credit for it?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/06/19/president-obama-took-credit-in-2012-for-withdrawing-all-troops-from-iraq-today-he-said-something-different/
Gaslighting aside, since when does the Iraqi government dictates US policies? I’m sure post-WWII Germany and Japan also didn’t want US troops there. But the US didn’t act based on what the German and Japanese government wanted, did they? What if the Iraqi government decides it would the US to send 100,000 troops to fight ISIS?
cunmarra says
I think we should all start studying in detail the Spanish Reconquista. In particular the ideology that inspired it and kept it alive for 700 years. It is the only successful model for dealing with Islam and its adherents that I am aware of from my study and view of history.
Uncle Vladdi says
Ever since Kissinger in Egypt, the motto of American governments has been:
“THERE’S NO MONEY IN SOLUTIONS! WHEE!”
And of course, what with 0bama wanting to be promoted to caliph as well…!
;-(