60-plus nations nominally in the coalition and over 1,000 airstrikes between Iraq and Syria, the US has thrown myriad data at Congress to try to prove “progress” in the war on ISIS. Yet a closer inspection reveals anything but.
Over 1,000 airstrikes sounds like a lot, but it’s not clear how many actually hit intended targets. McClatchy reported that some of the bombing locations were nearly 100 miles off of the target.
Watching what’s actually happening on the ground sure doesn’t help the case of the war, as ISIS controls virtually all of the territory it did at the start of the US war. They lost a few border villages and gained some others.
The US has had a similar problem during the Afghan occupation, claiming “progress” in general terms but offering no data that actually backs it up, and indeed, ignoring evidence that the war isn’t going well at all.
12 thoughts on “Anything But Progress: US Data Shows Little Results in ISIS War”
USG and NATO so as saudis and entire CCG taking their time prolonging this war to the time when they can politically, economically insure ISIS existence as a 500 bc caliphat regime, they allready in cooperation with a modernized version of ISIS "ideology" when it comes to Saudi arabia and rest of CCG. This the political culture of USG and English government, just last week the English naval base was restablished in Qatar with the blessing of Qatari family owned and operated government whom are buying the English real states like crazy. They simply protect their investments even by creating a barbaric regime as ISIS is. Englush left the Persian gulf, Dubai, Sharjah, Abu zabi back in 1970s, now they are back reclaiming their colonial, this is the world Neo democracy in action by the ways of Islamization, where even the turkish Erdogan regime is up to his neck into NATO fake democracy while Israel is watching.
You want to defeat ISIS, don't buy their oil and gas, you want to defeat ISIS, don't sale them any of your weapons. Libya didn't have that much weapons lasting for so many years as they claime all that weapons are from, Unless ISIS somehow manages to get their hands on what the international cartel of weapon smuggler selling the. The lists of these smugglers are written all over their file in cia and pentagon, Israel is one of them so as the Erdogan regime so as the Jordanian, so as the English, Saudis and CCG family owned and operated governments supported by western monarchism and their fake democracy.
I don't know if the coalition firing rockets or blank ?
let be serious , over 1000 raids meant to eliminate at least 10000 ASIS fighters
and destroy as many military equipments.. in reality non of that is happening.
I read that Iraqi Commander asked for support but have been rejected because it wasn't on the agenda.
They have their own air force, where was it?
Maybe the US can not be everywhere and of course they, as all people in the world, are not perfect.
The US is destroying all right, be sure of that if your aim is to grasp reality.
I am sorry, I just read that Iraq barely has an air force.
I think, if you follow the war in more detail, their are a lot of evidence that the airstrikes are having a great effect.
Before the airstrikes ISIS advanced quite quickly and when the airstrikes started, their progress has been halted and even reversed.
The main purpose with the airstrikes is to degrade ISIS through taking out heavy military equipment so that local forces can later on regain territory.
So the purpose is not to "win the war" with airstrikes but to degrade and to halt ISIS and to win some time until local forces have the ability to mobilize.
Without the airstrikes Iraq would probably be occupied by now including Baghdad and Kurdish territory. Kobane in Syria would have been lost. The yazidis would also been killed etc.
Eh, like what happened in Iraq War 2. Long and costly and pointless other than murder and mayhem and the destruction of the Iraqi state so a "democracy" (LOL) could be born.
The Kurds in Syria and Iraq are very positive to the airstrikes.
For example, I just read this, words from a Kurdish soldier in Iraq:
“Since the airstrikes we do not hear firing from them,” he said. “We still do not know their losses, but we are sure they have been completely devastated,” he added. “The situation is good now.”
"60 Minutes" ran a story last night that was completely anti-Assad, blaming him for all the destruction and killing going on in Syria. The "freedom fighters" were shown as pure and just. It did not mention any of the atrocities they've committed. The MSM coverage has been 100% anti-Assad from the start, even though Syria was a progressive (by ME standards) and secular country before all this madness started. Will the MSM ever run a story from Assad's perspective? Don't hold your breath.
From all the evidence available, the so-called US air-strikes seem designed to be a mere token of opposition to ISIS. This is unsurprising given that US and Israeli strategic aims favour accommodation with ISIS/opposition to Syria/Iran rather than with accommodation with Syria and Iran/opposition to ISIS. Israel has said this many times. The dilemma for US/Israel is the problem of the Kurds, Israel's best friend. If ISIS is too successful it may end up destroying Kurdish hopes of an independent state. So having encouraged the ISIS dog to run riot how to get it back into the cellar before it destroys the shop?
The facts speaks for themselves. US knows what it is doing and had once, for example, occupied (in 2003) Iraq and that occupation depended initially on a lot of airstrikes.
Iran, even as it is the next neighbour could hardly defend itself during the war in the 80s but they got instead a extremely lot of people killed.
So the USA knows what it is doing.
But if you (anyone) are against this war and the US coalition strikes does not hit its targets, you should not complain as it is, because of this, "no war". I mean a war must be at least two parties fighting each other and as you are saying that this is not happening, there is no war. Be happy!
Only the taxpayer will lose.
Comments are closed.