- Joined
- Jul 25, 2014
- Messages
- 9,869
- Reaction score
- 3,495
- Location
- Los Angeles area
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
What information do you have? I'm getting my facts primarily from Reddit and Wiki, and only occasionally mainstream Western media sources.
The fact of the matter is that airstrikes are incredibly effective against ISIS. Keep in mind that they're fighting a conventional war at this point, not an insurgency. They rely on troop formations, convoys, etc. just like any traditional state. Our strategy is making this spectacularly difficult for them, since any sizable gathering of troops and/or vehicles is a prime target for air power. As long as ISIS is a group that utilizes territorial control, bombing them will continue to work.
I get my information partly from longwarjournal.com and partly from various analysts and articles linked to on that site. And I do find the achievements you claim for U.S. airstrikes "incredible." An average on seven combat sorties a day over the last half-year, some of the aircraft involved in them probably returning with their ordnance because they could not locate the target, cannot do nearly as much as you suggest. The lack of troops on the ground to spot targets for aircraft further handicaps this pinprick air "campaign."
The fact the jihadists recently were able to occupy Khan al-Baghdadi, five miles away from al Asad air base, at which more than 300 Marines are training local forces, is hardly a testimony to progress. That is only about 75 miles up river from Baghdad. The fact the jihadists were able to attack and control the western outskirts of Kirkuk recently, right on the edge of the Kurdish region, also casts doubt about the effectiveness of the effort against them.
This President is a limpwristed incompetent who is not all that fond of things American. He is not about to do much more than he has been doing. The only two hopeful signs I have seen are, first, the ordering to Kuwait of a army brigade which among other heavy equipment normally has about 100 tanks. How much of their equipment will be with them, or their ultimate destination or mission, remains to be seen.
Second, there is evidence that the U.S. is building up supplies of munitions and armored vehicles at the former civil airfield near Irbil, in cooperation with the Kurdish provincial government. Both the location of this base and the fact it has an unusually long concrete runway--15,000 feet--suit it to a pretty large military effort of some type. (The relatively short distances from there to the uranium enrichment galleries at Fordoz and Natanz would also seem to make it a good place from which to launch strikes against them and other parts of Iran's atom bomb program--but without a real president, it's safe to dismiss that possibility.)