• Why Jihad Watch?
  • About Robert Spencer and Staff Writers
  • FAQ
  • Books
  • Muhammad
  • Islam 101
  • Privacy

Jihad Watch

Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts

Learned analysts starting to realize airstrikes alone will not dislodge Islamic State

May 27, 2015 11:07 pm By Robert Spencer

isis-vehicles islamic stateMainstream analysts usually lurch from mistake to mistake, applying faulty solutions based on fantasy-based analyses, without ever being held accountable for the disasters that follow in the wake of their actions. Just look at Obama and Hillary at Benghazi. But the idea that an entity that controls an expanse of territory larger than Great Britain will be dislodged by airstrikes alone is so risible that even mainstream analysts are having to acknowledge it.

“Analysis: Growing sense that airstrikes alone will not dislodge the Islamic State group,” Associated Press, May 27, 2015:

BAGHDAD – It is the modern era’s military strategy of choice: overwhelming air power delivering precision-guided punishment backed by intelligence on the ground, with minimal exposure for soldiers of the striking side.

Seductive though it is to risk-averse governments with war-weary publics, the approach has its limits — and these are on display in Syria and Iraq, where a U.S.-led coalition has carried out over 4,100 airstrikes against Islamic State radicals yet failed to stop the extremists.

August will mark a year since the campaign was launched after tens of thousands of minority Yazidis were forced to flee an onslaught by the militants in Iraq, causing a humanitarian crisis.

It was clear from the start that a ground force was needed, and Iraqi and Syrian Kurdish fighters have had successes on the battlefield. The Iraqi military was also to play a key role: air power would soften up the extremists, weakening them or getting them to flee, and the Iraqis were to deliver the final blow or retake areas abandoned by the militants.

That has not gone according to plan.

Badly humiliated and Shiite-dominated, Iraq’s army has shown little stamina in the mostly-Sunni cities taken by the Islamic State militants. In recent days U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter assessed it lacked the “will to fight” after fleeing Ramadi, the strategic capital of Iraq’s largest Sunni province, Anbar, leaving the Islamic State group in control of nearly all its territory, which stretches to the Jordan border….

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Follow me on Facebook

Filed Under: Islamic State (aka ISIS, ISIL, Daesh), willful ignorance Tagged With: airstrikes


Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Comments

  1. Martin Vink says

    May 27, 2015 at 11:25 pm

    There are no airstrikes. This war has continued for years and 4,000 air strikes equates to less than 10 air strikes a day. 75 % of aircraft are returned to base without firing a shot or without dropping a bomb . . . simply risking pilots’ lives and causing frustration to pilots who cannot obtain authorisation to hit targets as they see them . . . they run out of fuel before the authorisation is received.

    So let us try to run the comments by fact even if this war is run on deception . . . from both sides!

    During Desert Storm we had 1,125 strikes a day and the troops walked in unopposed. Whether or not a war can be won with air strikes alone cannot be answered unless we try it.

    • Shane says

      May 28, 2015 at 9:34 am

      Obama is not letting them bomb targets where civilians may be hit, which eliminates 90% of the targets as ISIS is smart enough to hide among the civiians. This does not explain why the USA did not target the ISIS invaders of Ramadi. The loss of that city to ISIS is an epic failure.

      • Oliver says

        May 28, 2015 at 11:09 am

        But Obama is a Muslim, that ( an airstrike there) might have killed his Muslim brothers and sisters.

        • Lynn says

          May 28, 2015 at 11:47 am

          Yeah, but we’re not supposed to know he’s been supplying ISIS from Benghazi thru these last 2 surrender of material. He’s (Valerie) making every military decision. It’s taking hours to get the OK to let one go, by then of course the subject has moved along…exactly the strategy he/she wants.

  2. mortimer says

    May 27, 2015 at 11:53 pm

    Martin Vink presents good arguments. To have good airstrikes, there must be an officer on the ground directing fire. That means sending in troops with the officer. That’s the only way to insure the ordnance reaches a proper target.

  3. Joseph says

    May 27, 2015 at 11:53 pm

    Ol’ Slimo, Hillary and the current administration will use this data to stop any retaliatory efforts altogether.
    They will say “If we can’t beat them we might as well join them” You might as well kiss the world goodby then.

  4. Davegreybeard says

    May 28, 2015 at 12:42 am

    Yeah, well this “Learned analyst” was taught in U.S. Army Infantry Officers Candidate School, that “the only way to get an enemy out of his hole in the ground is to send another man, with a gun, to get him out.”

    That was in 1967.

    Seems not much has changed since then.

  5. voegelinian says

    May 28, 2015 at 4:51 am

    Air strikes could work — they could stop ISIS in a matter of weeks. The reason people think they wouldn’t work is because they would be trying to limit their targets to the Tiny Minority of Extremists, while ignoring the masses of ordinary Muslims who support ISIS and with whom ISIS are convolved.

  6. Angemon says

    May 28, 2015 at 7:32 am

    It was clear from the start that a ground force was needed

    Not for the people in charge. Or maybe it was…

  7. spot on says

    May 28, 2015 at 8:05 am

    Maybe if B.O. and his generals actually tried to beat the enemy, things would be different.

  8. duh_swami says

    May 28, 2015 at 8:13 am

    Hitler tried to bomb Britain into surrender, and look how it worked out for him…Winning by airstrikes requires ground troops to take or retake territory. If every ISIS member was killed by the air, the vacuum created would be filled by someone with similar Allahic ambitions. It doesn’t have to be American troops, but someone has to do it…Iran maybe?

    • Oliver says

      May 28, 2015 at 11:15 am

      A few days ago, HEZBOLLAH asked for all of the various factions in Lebanon to join them (Hezbollah) in fighting ISISI. And this week, ISIS declared war on Hamas, and bombed a Hamas military position. (The brief account I read gave few details, and none-as far as I read) on fatalities (I hope that there were many).

      What would do the (civilized) world good is Hamas, Hezbollah and ISIS all fought against each other, (with or without shifting alliances, as long as the three did not unite) ( and throw Iran into the mix) and kill each other. The more the better. Both genders.

  9. RonaldB says

    May 28, 2015 at 8:37 am

    Carrying out extensive drone strikes, it seems to me, allows the government to carry out a low-level, half-baked war with minimal commitment of resources and even less commitment of analysis. In other words, it’s a way to avoid having to actually justify a war in the light of day.

    I’m also highly skeptical of extensive CIA covert operations, other than intelligence gathering and espionage, for the same reason. Our overthrow of the elected government of Iran in 1953 is an excellent example.

    The question is, do we want to participate in a war to dislodge and destroy IS? What are we going to replace it with? A democratic government? That train has passed. The future of the Middle East Muslims is strong man dictatorship. If a country is going to change, it will do so on its own, like Tunisia.

    It’s hard to deny the mess in the region was caused in large part through US bungling: our covert overthrow of the government of Libya, our destruction of all government structure in Iraq, our arming of Syrian rebels. Our administration supported the Muslim Brotherhood government in Egypt and opposed the military coup that deposed him.

    So, we’re now supposed to want our government to commit forces to fight in a war and occupy Syria, Libya and Iraq again? Do we have an occupation strategy that will work better this time in Iraq?

    Much of the damage is already done. Deposing Gaddaffy in Libya was totally unnecessary. He had already surrendered his chemical warfare ambitions, withdrew his sponsorship of terror, and was not a threat. Our supporting his overthrow (and gruesome murder) was not only immoral, but a case of shooting ourselves in the foot.

    The US should limit itself to supporting actual entities, such as the Kurdish state, with weapons and tactical air strikes. We should not carry out a war against IS because it’s “horrific”. If we are going to defeat an entity, we have to have a strategy to either replace it or dictate to it…and we have neither. We bungled the occupation of Iraq. Does anyone have confidence that our learning curve has taught us how to successfully build up nations in Muslim areas?

    The actors in that part of the world are Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Iraq, Syria, the Kurdish state, and Iran. I don’t see any benefit to the US getting in on a ground war in the area. To the argument that IS will inspire domestic Muslim terrorists: that horse has already left the barn. Political Islam is here, and it will inspire every Muslim resident and immigrant. If the US is going to “get tough” it needs to “get tough” on immigration, and allow no refugees, particularly Muslim refugees. Non-Muslims should be evaluated on an individual basis, but a country cannot be a dumping ground for the refuse and non-achievers of the world, and maintain its own identity and prosperity.

    • duh_swami says

      May 28, 2015 at 9:03 am

      Hillary said…Mubarak has to go, and he went. Then Hillary said Gaddafi has to go, and he went. Then she said, ‘We came, we saw, he died’, and laughed out loud, then Hillary said, Assad must go, and they are still working on that one. So, what is the meaning of these removals of ‘strong man ‘rulers, one after the other in a short time? There is a whole lot more to this story, than we are told…

      • RonaldB says

        May 28, 2015 at 11:09 am

        Well, the only organizing principle for all the inept bungling of the US government concerning the Middle East is a calculated policy against US interests, and I don’t see a mechanism for such a focused policy.

        But, while it is not productive to try to get into the heads of policy makers, one can see patterns from the outside. The pattern of US actions is such that instability, murder, and dissolution of functioning, though thoroughly despotic, governments results.

        I would like to see the US acting selfishly in its own interests. Don’t save the oppressed Iraqi people, the oppressed Syrian people, the oppressed Libyan people, the oppressed Egyptian people…all of whom were infinitely better off before our interventions. The US did not even issue a policy statement during the viciously-suppressed “Green Revolution” in Iran. And, actually, that’s ok with me. I think the people of Iran are talented and oppressed, and a large proportion (not necessarily the majority) would love to depose the mullahs and live in freedom. But, it’s not the job of the US to give it to them. Even though the US did single handed overthrow the last elected government of Iran in 1953. That weighs on my conscience, if on no one else’s, but I see any attempt at a remedy to be worse than forgetting it and moving on.

  10. Godwin says

    May 28, 2015 at 12:35 pm

    The war would have been won with air power if not because of the coward Iraqi army. They ran and deserted large quantity of their weapons to the enemy. They value their lives more than the kamakazi ISIS with the hope that America will send in its ground troops to help if they lost the war.
    On the other hand the Kurds stood their ground with little weapons supplied by the US.

    • Westman says

      May 28, 2015 at 3:07 pm

      Joining the Iraq Army was one of the few paying jobs with a consistent paycheck. The US has been training Iraqi troops for 10 years and there has been more than 100% turnover due to desertion. Most never joined to fight and desertions increase when battles loom. Every year we are told that the Iraq Army will soon be ready to protect Iraq without US soldiers. Let’s try the truth, which is – never.

      The US military is quite aware that there will never be an adequate US-supported Iraq Army. The politicians are afraid to say what a failure training and retention has been and keep acting like it was a surprise. They might have gotten away with such mendacity in 1914; with today’s networked communication the lies make them look arrogant and delusional.

      They, like the Roman Royalty of old, are too insulated and protected to get much more than “yes men” responses from the messengers who don’t want their social and economic lives to end. We seem to be observing a Roman Circus where our leaders should be.

      What we need is all of the Washington Administration out of Washington and into the ME fighting against ISIS for a month. The survivors would come back with a new perspective. When we have pilots remotely shooting missiles from half a world away, going home for supper, and non-stop Washington parties, there is too much insulation.

  11. Dave says

    May 28, 2015 at 1:04 pm

    These airstrikes (if they even happened) are ineffective because IS has adapted to them by decentralizing their fighters and weapons to avoid mass casualties.
    We only need to use attack helicopters and A-10 “warthogs” to attack their convoys when they move out of their captured territories to attack other areas.
    Remember the “hi way of death” of Iraqi soldiers fleeing Kuwait?
    The only way IS is allowed to operate is because we allow it.
    US foreign policy has been “farmed-out” to the Turks,Saudis and Gulf States and its Jihadist proxies which is why it is a disaster and a disgrace.

  12. Davegreybeard says

    May 28, 2015 at 1:36 pm

    @RonaldB
    “Well, the only organizing principle for all the inept bungling of the US government concerning the Middle East is a calculated policy against US interests, and I don’t see a mechanism for such a focused policy.”

    That “mechanism” is Barak Hussein Obama.

    Just about every move Obama makes is “against U.S. interests,” which is a big part of the reason why we (and the world) are in the mess that we are in.

    Bush, the affable bungler, failed to understand the enemy, but at least he was a patriot and believed in America. His invasion of Afghanistan was to eliminate the terrorist threat that we faced at the time. That move took bold courage and was the right thing to do. His invasion of Iraq was based on the best intelligence we had, which most of the world and most of the Democrats believed at the time. A majority of Democrats voted for “use of force,” including Hillary – remember?

    Bush failed to understand the enemy, as do the vast majority of our fellow Americans, and this is a huge problem. But he was not actively working against our interests.

    Obama is entirely different than Bush in that he is not merely a “bungler” (although there’s some of that too) he is actively working to reduce America as a world power. This is obvious to anyone who has eyes to see, and a functioning brain. Recall:

    “We will FUDAMENTALLY change America”

    “For the first time in my adult life I am proud of America”

    “No, no, no, not God bless America, God damn America” – Barak’s “spiritual mentor” for twenty years.

    The main job of NASA is to make Muslims feel good about their history

    Sending the bust of Winston Churchill back to Britain – why do you think he did that, what do you suppose he was thinking?

    “Fast and Furious” the Obama manufactured, and criminal, gun running scheme calculated to garner support for anti 2nd Amendment legislation.

    Weaponizing the IRS to persecute his political enemies

    Flooding the country with illegal aliens, and creating law out of thin air to do it, in contravention to our Constitution

    Obama and the Democrat’s “war on cops,” “war on corporations,” “war on the rich’” “war on banks,” “war on white people.”

    “The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam.”

    And that’s just some of it off the top of my head.

    Obama sees America as “the problem” in the world, to be reduced, taken down a peg or two, or three. He is a racist with a chip on his shoulder and a Muslim agenda, and he is out to “get even.” It is an open question whether America, as we know it, can survive him.

    And the “mess” we find ourselves in is going to get worse – Obama will see to it.
    .

  13. Dirka Dirka says

    May 28, 2015 at 2:03 pm

    Wars are won by taking and holding ground and being better at killing more of the enemy than they kill of yours.

  14. Bezelel says

    May 28, 2015 at 5:30 pm

    They have yet to try some precision guided MOAB’s which would be a stop gap to tactical nukes.

  15. Jim says

    Jun 5, 2015 at 9:53 am

    ISIS could be literally wiped out in a matter of days is Barack Hussein Obama was not on their side.

FacebookYoutubeTwitterLog in

Subscribe to the Jihad Watch Daily Digest

You will receive a daily mailing containing links to the stories posted at Jihad Watch in the last 24 hours.
Enter your email address to subscribe.

Please wait...

Thank you for signing up!
If you are forwarding to a friend, please remove the unsubscribe buttons first, as they my accidentally click it.

Subscribe to all Jihad Watch posts

You will receive immediate notification.
Enter your email address to subscribe.
Note: This may be up to 15 emails a day.

Donate to JihadWatch
FrontPage Mag

Search Site

Translate

The Team

Robert Spencer in FrontPageMag
Robert Spencer in PJ Media

Articles at Jihad Watch by
Robert Spencer
Hugh Fitzgerald
Christine Douglass-Williams
Andrew Harrod
Jamie Glazov
Daniel Greenfield

Contact Us

Terror Attacks Since 9/11

Archives

  • 2020
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2019
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2018
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2017
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2016
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2015
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2014
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2013
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2012
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2011
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2010
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2009
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2008
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2007
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2006
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2005
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2004
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2003
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • March

All Categories

You Might Like

Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Recent Comments

  • gravenimage on Erdogan: ‘Turks must defend the rights of Jerusalem, even with their lives’ for ‘the honor of the Islamic nation’
  • Walter Sieruk on Iranian Kurdistan: Muslim brothers behead their sister in honor killing over her romantic relationship
  • gravenimage on Uighur leader: ‘We’re actually quite worried’ about what Biden might let China get away with
  • James Lincoln on Iranian Kurdistan: Muslim brothers behead their sister in honor killing over her romantic relationship
  • revereridesagain on Audio: Robert Spencer on Muslim Brotherhood influence in a Biden/Harris administration

Popular Categories

dhimmitude Sharia Jihad in the U.S ISIS / Islamic State / ISIL Iran Free Speech

Robert Spencer FaceBook Page

Robert Spencer Twitter

Robert Spencer twitter

Robert Spencer YouTube Channel

Books by Robert Spencer

Jihad Watch® is a registered trademark of Robert Spencer in the United States and/or other countries - Site Developed and Managed by Free Speech Defense

Content copyright Jihad Watch, Jihad Watch claims no credit for any images posted on this site unless otherwise noted. Images on this blog are copyright to their respective owners. If there is an image appearing on this blog that belongs to you and you do not wish for it appear on this site, please E-mail with a link to said image and it will be promptly removed.

Our mailing address is: David Horowitz Freedom Center, P.O. Box 55089, Sherman Oaks, CA 91499-1964

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.