Terrorists in Iraq are Fleeing in Fear of Being Targetted

 

Editor’s Note: A great article from our good friend Sara Carter.

Terrorists In Iraq Fearing U.S. Targeting: Are Fleeing and Hiding After Soleimani Killing

U.S. officials have intercepted chatter and received confirmation that terrorist leaders in Iraq have been fleeing the region and have gone into hiding fearing United States intelligence capabilities after the successful airstrike that killed Iranian Quds Force leader Qassem Soleimani, according to multiple sources that spoke to SaraACarter.com. 

Soleimani, the leader of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard’s Quds Force, was killed early Friday morning as he stepped off his plane and headed to the SUV at the Baghdad Airport in Iraq. The U.S. developed extraordinary actionable intelligence to target the most wanted terrorist in the world and it was a ‘precision strike’ that caught the Iranian government off guard, said a White House official, who spoke on background due to the sensitive nature of their work.

For the past two decades, U.S. and Western intelligence officials have worked to monitor Soleimani’s movements, as well as his planned attacks on overseas assets, U.S. troops and civilians. He was a designated terrorist by the United States but previous administrations, including both Obama and the Bush administrations, stayed clear of targeting him directly fearing possible retaliation from Iran or escalation of war. For twenty years Soleimani operated with impunity directing Iran’s financial purse to terrorist proxies around the world, while also planning Iranian military strategy in the region. His death was an extraordinary blow to the Iranian regime. During the Obama administration he was frequently reported to be traveling throughout the Iraqi region despite sanctions limiting his travel and was working closely with Iranian allies in the Iraq government, said a U.S. official, who works in the region.

President Trump’s ‘decapitation strike targeting general Qassem Soleimani was a seminal moment, a change in strategy for the United States,’  Daniel Hoffman

Under President Donald Trump the tables have turned. It was apparent that the president was ready to take the action necessary when U.S. intelligence officials informed him that Soleimani was in the planning stages of a strategic attack targeting Americans that was expected to come within days, said a White House official, with knowledge of the airstrike. Trump’s decisive decision to act on the intelligence he was given and to target Soleimani saved countless American lives, the official added.

The White House official added that shortly after the airstrike that killed Soleimani information began to surface that other terrorist leaders in the region were ‘fleeing,’ and others had gone into hiding.

And on Wednesday, as Trump addressed the nation, woven into his words was the warning to terrorists in the region that Soleimani was only one of many terror leaders U.S. officials are monitoring in effort to prevent attacks on U.S. assets, the homeland and Americans overseas.

“Last week, we took decisive action to stop a ruthless terrorist from threatening American lives. At my direction, the United States Military eliminated the world’s top terrorist, Qassem Soleimani,” said Trump. “Soleimani’s hands were drenched in both American and Iranian blood. He should have been terminated long ago. By removing Soleimani, we have sent a powerful message to terrorists: if you value your own life, you will not threaten the lives of our people.”

The message was heard loud and clear in Iraq. U.S. officials intercepted communications and intelligence suggesting that terrorists in the region were signaling immediate concerns over Iran’s inability to protect Soleimani from the U.S.

James Carafano, vice president of foreign and defense policy studies at the Heritage Foundation, told this reporter that Iran’s inability to protect its most prized asset was a message to proxy terrorist organizations and terror leaders that they were vulnerable.

“Makes sense,” said Carafano. “If this is all Iran will do to avenge Soleimani no one can expect Tehran to expend a lot of capital to protect them from the Americans.”

Daniel Hoffman, a retired CIA station chief and former chief of the CIA‘s Middle East Department, said the president’s “decapitation strike targeting general Qassem Soleimani was a seminal moment, a change in strategy for the United States and how we deal with Iran’s aggression.”

Hoffman, whose work in the region is extensive, said Trump made it clear “that we will deal with everyone’s proxy militia foot soldiers but we will also deal with Iranian leaders who are responsible for making the decisions that put our people and installations in harms way.”

Hoffman added that it’s “with a high level of confidence that Iran’s military leaders have likely changed their calculus about the risks they are taking by ordering strikes against the United States.”

The White House official said the precision airstrike on Soleimani, along with America’s strong intelligence capabilities in the region, sent a direct message that Iran’s militia leaders and its Quds Force are being closely monitored. The White House official, however, would not go into details as to what Soleimani was preparing to do the night he was killed or the exact nature of his planned attack against America.

The White House official added that for the president “just one American life was enough” to target the world’s most wanted terrorist but the actionable intelligence he received regarding the attack was enough to make the decision.

As for why Soleimani had taken the risk of traveling to Iraq shortly after Trump had tweeted the warning to Iran that there would be retribution for the attack by its proxy militias on the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad and the death of U.S. contractor Nawres Hamid, 33, the White House official said it was apparent that Soleimani felt “emboldened” because past administrations did little to stop his actions or his travel. Hamid, who was the father of two young children, became a naturalized citizen in 2017.

Further, stronger economic sanctions against Iran and the administration’s withdrawal from the JCPOA weakened the regime’s intelligence apparatus lessening its ability to protect its top commander, the White House official said.

A former senior military official, who now works in the region, told SaraACarter.com that “President Trump’s decision to put American contractors and military personnel first was a reversal from the Obama administration’s position and is going to save more American lives than people realize.”

“He has put our nation first,” the former military official said. “We’re respected and we’ll be safer because of it – it’s already working, terrorists are hearing the message loud and clear.”

Article

13 hrs vs 13 minutes followed by removing the threat: Soleimani via a UAV

   Smile!

 

 

Editor’s Note:

“This was a great move by Trump and exemplifies true leadership. Again, this goes back to Joint Operations_The Lily Pad Strategy. Intelligence generates actionable threat targets and takes action to destroy the target, anywhere, anytime. I know Trump understands this new warfighting strategy.”

“General Qassem Soleimani and his command of the Quds and IRGC forces as well as a multitude of Iran supported militias throughout the Middle East have been a consistent threat throughout the Middle East. As well, he and his command reached into South America, Yemen, Syria, Iraq. This command leadership has now been eliminated so the question is what will be Khomeini and the Ayatollah will do. Trump is prepared and will execute his Joint Strike Force Operations as necessary.”

Paul E Vallely MG, US Army (Ret)
Chairman, Stand Up America US Foundation
Chairman – Legacy National Security Advisory Group

Founding Member – Citizens Commission on National Security

 

As the father of Navy SEAL Ty Woods who was killed in Benghazi, Libya I would like to personally thank President Trump for his clear and decisive action to rescue the Americans under attack at our U.S. Embassy in Baghdad.

If Donald Trump had been President on September 11, 2012 instead of Obama or Mrs. Clinton, my son Ty would be alive today.

Respectfully
Charles Woods
Father of Navy SEAL Ty Woods



13 hrs vs 13 minutes followed by removing the threat: Soleimani via a UAV

Trump orders attack that kills Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani, other military officials in Baghdad, Pentagon says

By Frank Miles, Fox News.

President Trump ordered a game-changing U.S. military attack that killed Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani, the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ elite Quds Force, among other military officials at Baghdad International Airport early Friday, the Pentagon confirmed.

Soleimani is the military mastermind whom Secretary of State Mike Pompeo had deemed equally as dangerous as Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. In October, Baghdadi killed himself during a U.S. raid on a compound in northwest Syria, seven months after the so-called ISIS “caliphate” crumbled as the terrorist group lost its final swath of Syrian territory in March.

Iran’s Foreign Minister Javad Zarif tweeted after the attack “The US’ act of international terrorism, targeting & assassinating General Soleimani—THE most effective force fighting Daesh (ISIS), Al Nusrah, Al Qaeda et al—is extremely dangerous & a foolish escalation.”

He added that the U.S. “bears responsibility for all consequences of its rogue adventurism.”

In April 2019, the State Department announced Iran was responsible for killing 608 U.S. troops during the Iraq War. Soleimani was the head of the Iranian and Iranian-backed forces carrying out those operations killing American troops. According to the State Department, 17 percent of all deaths of U.S. personnel in Iraq from 2003 to 2011 were orchestrated by Soleimani.

As recently as 2015, a travel ban and United Nations Security Council resolutions had barred Soleimani from leaving Iran.

Friday’s Baghdad strike also killed Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the deputy commander of Iran-backed militias known as the Popular Mobilization Forces, a source told Fox News.

In all, at least seven people were killed and at least three rockets were fired, officials told The Associated Press. An official with the Popular Mobilization Forces said its airport protocol officer, Mohammed Reda, also died.

Hours after the attack was announced, President Trump tweeted a simple image of the American flag.

Soleimani was the long-running leader of the elite intelligence wing called Quds Force – which itself has been a designated terror group since 2007, and is estimated to be 20,000 strong. Considered one of the most powerful men in Iran, he routinely was referred to as its “shadow commander” or “spymaster.”

Their deaths marked a potential turning point in the Middle East, and are expected to draw severe retaliation from Iran and the forces it’s backed in the Middle East against Israel and American interests.

An official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told The Associated Press that Muhandis had arrived to the airport in a convoy to receive Soleimani whose plane had arrived from either Lebanon or Syria. The airstrike occurred as soon as he descended from the plane to be greeted by Muhandis and his companions, killing them all.

A senior politician said Soleimani’s body was identified by the ring he wore.

Iraq’s Security Media Cell, which released information regarding Iraqi security, said the three rockets landed near the cargo hall.

Iraqi security also said two cars were on fire.

The two-day siege outside of the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad came to an end Wednesday afternoon after dozens of pro-Iran militiamen and their supporters withdrew from the compound.

The crisis started early Tuesday, when, in an orchestrated assault, hundreds of protesters stormed the embassy compound, one of the most heavily fortified U.S. diplomatic missions in the world.

President Trump, who on Tuesday night vowed that the situation “will not be a Benghazi” — a pointed reference to the deadly 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Libya on the Obama administration’s watch, ordered deployment of about 750 U.S. soldiers to the Middle East.

The embassy attack, one of the worst in recent memory, followed deadly U.S. airstrikes on Sunday that killed 25 fighters of the Iran-backed group, the Kataeb Hezbollah. The U.S. military said the airstrikes were retaliation for last week’s killing of an American contractor in a rocket attack on an Iraqi military base, which the U.S. blamed on the militia.

Secretary of Defense Mark Esper reacted on Thursday to the U.S. Embassy attack in Iraq earlier this week, saying that it’s time for Iran to start “acting like a normal country.”

“We are there in Iraq working with our Iraqi partners to ensure the enduring defeat of ISIS,” Esper said on “America’s Newsroom” on Thursday.

“Through the president’s direction, we were able to physically defeat the caliphate that remains physically defeated, if you will,” he added. “And now, our aim is to deter further Iranian bad behavior that has been going on now for over 40 years. It’s time that Iran started acting like a normal country.”

Fox News’ Lucas Tomlinson, John Roberts, Mike Arroyo and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Article

“Stand beside her, and guide her, through the night with A light from above”…


 

US to go it alone in Libya against ISIS?

GENERALS FEAR BENGHAZI 2 IN LIBYA

By F. Michael Maloof – WND

WASHINGTON – As Washington prepares to take “decisive military action” in Libya against the alarming growth of ISIS, retired generals have told G2 Bulletin they are concerned that the United States may go it alone, according to a new report in Joseph Farah’s G2 Bulletin.

They ask which allies, if any, will join a coalition and attempt to work with a Libyan government that barely exists.

The late Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi
The late Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi

At a news conference last week, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Marine Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr. said the U.S. is “looking to take decisive military action” against ISIS in Libya and that a decision would be coming “in weeks” but “not hours.”

“It’s fair to say that we’re looking to take decisive military action against ISIS in conjunction with the political process” in Libya, Dunford said. “The president has made clear that we have the authority to use military force.”

ISIS is thought to have more than 3,000 fighters, with more flowing into Libya from Syria and Iraq, where the U.S., Russia and other countries have been carrying out intense airstrikes against the jihadist fighters.

Another ‘trillion-dollar failure’?

In October 2011, the U.S., France and Britain launched attacks that led to the overthrow of the government of Libyan leader Muammar Gadhafi. Since then, the country has not had a functional government. Warring factions of local jihadist groups are preoccupied fighting among themselves for dominance rather than taking on ISIS or coming together to form a government of national accord.

U.S. action in Libya, retired U.S. Air Force Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney told G2Bulletin in an email, “is the last thing we need to do!”

“Why spend (a trillion dollars) for another COIN (counterinsurgency) failure?”

Retired U.S. Adm. James Lyons Jr., who served as commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet from 1985-1987, told G2Bulletin that McInerney’s concern about the possibility of unilateral U.S. action is “Spot on!”

Retired U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Paul E. Vallely expressed similar concerns to G2Bulletin, concluding Dunford’s comments represent a military invasion by the Obama administration.

“I can’t even see Obama taking any offensive action anywhere like that,” Vallely said.

Vallely is chairman of the non-profit Stand Up America and the private Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi, which is looking into the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi.

He said that if there is to be any such military action, it needs to include Egypt, which bombed ISIS locations in Libya after the February 2015 beheading of some 21 Libyan Coptic Christians who were working in the country.

Vallely also thought the Russians could join, especially if asked by Egypt, since Moscow has just concluded a $2 billion military arms deal with Cairo that includes helicopters, fighter jets, Kornet anti-tank weapons, the anti-ballistic missile system Antey-2500 and the Buk-2 surface-to-air missile system.

Get the rest of this report, and others, at Joseph Farah’s G2 Bulletin.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/01/generals-fear-benghazi-2-in-libya/#cg3TDbtqr1Rm6Guz.99

Dem Lies, Memes, Bush and WMD to Fit Lack of ME Policy

Editor’s Note – As we see Obama spin and twist the story about Russia entering the war in Syria as a sign of Russian weakness, he deflects by calling his detractors’ ideas as “half-baked” and “mumbo jumbo”, and apparently he forgot about Hillary Clinton’s idea for a “no-fly” zone.

Major Garret posed that question to him yesterday and his answer called for a quick two-step and then referred to the fact that she being a candidate and being President were two different things.

“Hillary Clinton is not half-baked in terms of her approach to these problems,” Obama said carefully, reminding reporters she served in his administration as Secretary of State. But Obama pointed out that Clinton’s rhetoric on Syria is merely campaign rhetoric.

“I also think that there’s a difference between running for president and being president,” he said carefully, pointing out that he was having specific discussions with his military advisors about the right way forward in Syria. “If and when she’s president, then she’ll make those judgments and she’s been there enough that she knows that, you know, these are tough calls,” he said. (Read more here at Breitbart.)

Classic Obama deflection, or twist in the wind like he has done on almost everything Iraq related, including sticking to old lies and societal memes that have long since been disproved as bunk. But it is not just Obama dancing fast and loose with the facts, it seems every single Democrat is as well. Victor Davis Hanson shows us the proof below and reminds us of the stunning flips and flops, lies and half-truths, and stark regularity you can bank on at a Reno Casino in all likelihood.

The Left would rather forget its old slogan, “Bush lied, thousands died.”

By Victor Davis Hanson – National Review

The very mention of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and Iraq was toxic for Republicans by 2005. They wanted to forget about the supposed absence of recently manufactured WMD in great quantities in Iraq; Democrats saw Republican defensiveness as key to their recovery in 2006.

george w

By the time Obama was elected, the issue had been demagogued to death, was no longer of any political utility, and so vanished.

So why all of a sudden is the New York Times strangely focused on old WMD stockpiles showing up in Iraq? Is the subtext perhaps that the rise of ISIS poses an existential threat in such a dangerous landscape (and by extension offers an explanation for the current bombing)?

Or are we to be reminded that Bush stirred up a WMD hornets’ nest that Obama was forced to deal with? Or is the sudden interest intended to preempt the story now before we learn that ISIS routinely employs WMD against the Kurds? How strange that Iraq, WMD, bombing, and preemption reappear in the news, but now without the hysteria of the Bush era.

Indeed, for the last two years, reports of WMD of some sort have popped up weekly in Kurds and Iraq. Bashar Assad has used them, apparently with strategic profit, both in deterring his enemies and in embarrassing the red lines of Barack Obama, who had threatened to bomb him if he dared use them.

ISIS is rumored to have attempted to use mustard gas against the Kurds. Iraqi depots are periodically found, even as they are often dismissed as ossified beyond the point of easy use, or as already calibrated and rendered inert by either U.N. inspectors or U.S. occupation forces. But where did all the WMD come from, and why the sudden fright now about these stockpiles’ being deployed?

For much of the Bush administration we heard from the Left the refrain, “Bush lied, thousands died,” as if the president had cooked intelligence reports to conjure up a nonexistent threat from Saddam Hussein’s stockpiles of WMD — stockpiles that Bill Clinton had insisted until his last days in office posed an existential threat to the United States.

Apparently if a horde of gas shells of 20th-century vintage was found, it was then deemed irrelevant — as if WMD in Iraq could only be defined as huge Iraqi plants turning out 21st-century stockpiles weeks before the invasion.

The smear of Bush was the bookend of another popular canard, the anti-Bush slogan “No blood for oil.” Once the fact that the U.S. did not want Iraqi oil was indisputable, that slander metamorphosed. Almost immediately the Left pivoted and charged that we were not so much oil sinister as oil stupid.

If the Iraqi oil ministry, for the first time in its history, was both acting transparently and selling oil concessions to almost anyone except American companies, it was now cast as typically ungracious in not appreciating the huge American expenditure of blood and treasure that had allowed it such latitude.

Was the Iraq War then a stupid war that helped Russia and the Chinese? Poor Bush ended up not so much sinister as a naïf.

Although we don’t hear much any more about “No blood for oil,” the lie about “Bush lied, thousands died” has never been put to rest.

What was odd about the untruth was not just that Michael Moore, Cindy Sheehan, and the anti-war street crowd become popular icons through spreading such lies, but that the Democratic party — whose kingpins (Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Harry Reid, et al.) had all given fiery speeches in favor of invading Iraq — refined the slur into an effective 2006 talking point.

That Democrats from Nancy Pelosi to Harry Reid had looked at the same intelligence from CIA Director (and Clinton appointee) George “slam-dunk” Tenet (who authored a self-serving memoir ankle-biting George W. Bush while still in office), and had agreed with Tenet’s assessments, at least until the insurgency destroyed public support for the war, was conveniently forgotten.

The Bush administration did not help much. It never replied to its critics that fear of stockpiled WMD had originally been a Clinton-administration fear, a congressional fear, an international fear — and a legitimate fear.

I suppose that the Bush people wanted the issue of WMD to just go away, given the insurgency raging in Iraq and the effective Democratic campaign to reinvent fear of WMD as a sinister Bush conspiracy. (Do we remember Colin Powell’s U.N. testimony and the years that followed — cf. the Valerie Plame/Richard Armitage fiasco — in which he licked his wounds while harboring anger at his former associates for his own career-ending presentation?)

In sum, the Bush White House certainly did not remind the country that most of the Clinton-era liberal politicians in the 1990s had warned us about Iraqi WMD (do we even remember the 1998 Iraq Liberation Act?).

Nor were we reminded that foreign leaders like Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak had predicted mass death for any invaders who challenged Saddam’s WMD arsenal. (“General Franks, you must be very, very careful.

We have spoken with Saddam Hussein. He is a madman. He has WMD — biologicals, actually — and he will use them on your troops.”) Was part of the Bush administration’s WMD conspiracy forcing tens of thousands of U.S. troops to lug about chemical suits and masks in the desert?

No one, of course, noted that the initial success in Iraq also helped shut down Moammar Qaddafi’s WMD program in Libya and pressured the Pakistanis to arrest (for a while) the father of their bomb, Dr. A. Q. Khan. The latter nations apparently feared that the U.S. was considering removing dictators who that they knew had stockpiled WMD.

The current The Iran-Iraq War by Williamson Murray and Kevin Woods is a frightening reminder of how Saddam massacred the Kurds (perhaps well over 150,000 killed), often with gas, and how habitual was Saddam’s use of WMD against the Iranians in that medieval war.

Nor do we remember that James Clapper, in one of his earlier careerist contortions as a Bush-era intelligence officer, along with top-ranking officials in both the Iraqi and Syrian air forces, all warned us that WMD were stealthily transferred to Syria on the eve of the invasion of Iraq.

The dutifully toadyish Clapper added the intensifier adverb “unquestionably” to emphasize his certainty. Clapper, remember, went on to become Obama’s director of national intelligence and a key adviser on much of the current Obama Middle East decision-making, including the near bombing of Syria.*

So there were stocks of at least older WMD throughout Iraq when we arrived in 2003, and it was plausible that many of the newer and more deployable versions somehow found their way into Syria.

So worried was Barack Obama about the likelihood of Syrian WMD that he almost started a preemptive war against Bashar Assad, but without authorization of Congress and with no attempt to go to the U.N., as Bush had done. (Indeed, we are now preemptively bombing Iraq on the basis of the 2002 authorizations that state legislator and memoirist Barack Obama derided at the time.)

There were all sorts of untold amnesias about Iraq. No one remembers the 23 writs that were part of the 2002 authorizations that apparently Obama believes are still in effect.

They included genocide, bounties for suicide bombers, an attempt to kill a former U.S. president, the harboring of terrorists (among them one of the 1993 World Trade Center bombers), and a whole litany of charges that transcended WMD and were utterly unaffected by the latter controversy.

How surreal is it that Obama is preemptively bombing Iraq on twelve-year-old congressional authorizations that he opposed as trumped up and now may be relevant in relationship to dealing with Syrian and Iraqi stockpiles of WMD?

We forget too how Harry Reid declared the surge a failure and the war lost even as it was being won. Or how Barack Obama predicted that the surge would make things worse, before scrubbing such editorializing from his website when the surge worked.

Do we remember those days of General Betray Us (the ad hominem ad that the New York Times, which supposedly will not allow purchased ad hominem ads, granted at a huge discount), and the charges from Hillary Clinton that Petraeus was lying (“suspension of disbelief”)?

As Obama megaphones call for national unity in damning Leon Panetta’s critiques during the present bombing, do we remember the glee with which the Left greeted the tell-all revelations of Paul O’Neill, George Tenet, and Scott McClellan during the tenure of George W. Bush, or how they disparaged the surge when Americans were dying to implement it?

It is hard to recall now the fantasy climate that surrounded “Bush lied, thousands died.” Cindy Sheehan is now utterly forgotten. So mostly is the buffoonish propagandist Michael Moore, except for an occasion tidbit about a nasty divorce and cat fights over his man-of-the-people sizable portfolio — and occasional attacks on Barack Obama’s supposed racial tokenism.

Hillary’s shrill outbursts about Iraq evolved into “What difference, at this point, does it make?” Barack Obama rode his anti-war distortions to the presidency only to adopt his own anti-terrorism protocols and preemptive wars using the Bush-era justifications, but without the candor and congressional authorizations.

The media went from “No blood for oil” and “Bush lied, thousands died” to noting strange discoveries of WMD and trumpeting near energy independence.

The U.S. is now nonchalantly referred to as the world’s largest oil producer, but largely because the Bush administration green-lighted fracking and horizontal drilling, which the present administration opposes and yet cites as one of its singular achievements in terms of lowering gas prices — the one bright spot in an otherwise dismal economic record.

So we live in an era of lies about everything from Benghazi and Obamacare to the alphabet soup of scandal and incompetence at the IRS, ICE, VA, USSS (Secret Service), NSA, GSA, and even the CDC.

But before we can correct the present lies, we should first address the greatest untruth in this collection: “Bush lied, thousands died” was an abject lie.


NRO contributor Victor Davis Hanson is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and the author, most recently, of The Savior Generals.


* Here is an excerpt from the October 2003 New York Times story:

The director of a top American spy agency said Tuesday that he believed that material from Iraq’s illicit weapons program had been transported into Syria and perhaps other countries as part of an effort by the Iraqis to disperse and destroy evidence immediately before the recent war.

The official, James R. Clapper Jr., a retired lieutenant general, said satellite imagery showing a heavy flow of traffic from Iraq into Syria, just before the American invasion in March, led him to believe that illicit weapons material “unquestionably” had been moved out of Iraq.

“I think people below the Saddam Hussein-and-his-sons level saw what was coming and decided the best thing to do was to destroy and disperse,” General Clapper, who leads the National Imagery and Mapping Agency, said at a breakfast with reporters.

Daesh (ISIS) Closes in on Baghdad Airport, Kobani – Obama Fail

Editor’s Note – The charade that is Obama’s assault on Daesh (ISIS), meant to degrade and destroy is obvious now – it is just a political ploy to get him through the midterms. Once again, Obama and team place politics ahead of policy, and sadly, American and allied national security.

In addition to the article below that shows that Daesh is ready to ruin Baghdad’s days ahead, especially the lifeline international airport, they are now poised to take Kobani in Syria on the Turkish border. The experts believe that if they take it, there will be a bloodbath amongst the refugee population if the Turks do not intercede.

The Turks are poised in a defensive front, but will they take offensive action?

Intense street fighting raged in the Syrian city of Kobani Monday as ISIS came closer to capturing a key area on the border with Turkey.
ISIS fighters planted their flag on a hill on the eastern side of Kobani, then punched through defenses to open up the route for more troops, one witness inside the city told CNN.isidypg

CNN crews on Monday also spotted what appeared to be the black flag of ISIS flying from a hilltop on the eastern side of the city. The flag was farther east into the city from one shown flying atop a building in video from Reuters and also seen by the CNN crews.

Many Kurdish forces defending the city were wounded and killed, and many ISIS fighters were also killed as clashes spread from street to street, the witness said.

The fall of the city would carry huge symbolic and strategic weight, giving ISIS sway over an uninterrupted swatch of land between the Turkish border and its self-declared capital in Raqqa, Syria, 100 kilometers (62 miles) away.

The Turkish military, which has bulked up its defenses along the border in recent days as the fighting has flared, blocked people fleeing the embattled city from crossing the border. (Read the rest here.)

America – take note, Obama needs to take ownership for all of the carnage – he earned it!

ISIL Within Shelling Range of Baghdad Airport

Gaining ground in both Iraq, Syria

By   – Washington Free Beacon

The United States appears to be losing its fight against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL or ISIS) in Iraq and Syria, experts say, as the jihadist group adapts to U.S. airstrikes and advances toward Baghdad and a strategic town on the Syrian-Turkish border.

McClatchy reported on Friday that ISIL had established an operational presence in Abu Ghraib, a town within miles of the capital Baghdad that could enable the militants to shell the Baghdad International Airport with artillery. The airport serves as a key transit point for Western embassies and houses a joint operations center with U.S. military advisers.

A Defense Department spokeswoman said there were no indications yet that ISIL had taken over Abu Ghraib.baghdad_-_airport_and_green_zone

ISIL has also made significant gains in recent days in Iraq’s western Anbar province, where it has seized the town of Hit and launched assaults on other military bases in the region. Hundreds of Iraqi soldiers have been captured, and U.S. and allied airstrikes appear to have failed to push back ISIL from its strongholds in Anbar.

In Syria, ISIL engaged in intense fighting on Monday with Kurdish forces in Kobani—a key town near the Turkish border that could grant Islamic militants new smuggling lines for fighters and supplies if they control it. U.S. airstrikes have also failed to relieve ISIL’s siege of Kobani.

Additionally, the Wall Street Journal reported on Sunday that ISIL fighters have adopted new tactics to evade airstrikes and retain control of territory, including avoiding the use of cell phones and radios, removing their leaders and weapons from bases in Syria, and blending in with the civilian population.

Wayne Hsieh, an associate professor at the U.S. Naval Academy and a former State Department official who served in Iraq, said in an interview that “things are not going well.”

”The problem at the end of the day is how seriously [President Obama] takes this,” he said.

”Is this the president’s response to political pressure placed on him after the execution of [American journalist James] Foley, or does he really want to degrade and destroy the Islamic State? If he really does want to degrade and destroy the Islamic State, I think you’re going to have to see escalation, but the situation on the ground militarily is so problematic.”

Hsieh said he did not believe Baghdad was close to falling to ISIL, but added that sustained attacks on the airport there would pose a serious threat to supplies for Western embassies and the U.S. military personnel that are stationed there. He questioned why the United States had not provided arms to the YPG, the Syrian Kurdish forces battling ISIL in Kobani that previously helped save tens of thousands of Yazidis in Iraq.

Turkey, whose parliament voted last week to authorize strikes in Iraq and Syria, still has not aided the Syrian Kurds because of their ties to the PKK, a group that both Ankara and Washington have designated as a terrorist organization.

Hsieh noted that the U.S. military and its allies are largely using bases in the Persian Gulf to strike ISIL in Iraq and Syria, meaning their planes have to cover longer distances and must spend more time refueling than if they had bases in Iraq. Operating from Iraq would likely require more U.S. troops on the ground to secure the bases.

isilartilleryNavy officials have said they are relying on ships and aircraft that are already in the region and do not plan on deploying another carrier due to the limited nature of the strikes. Those limitations could be contributing to the inability so far of the airstrikes to uproot ISIL from its positions, Hsieh argued.

“That just shows you how not seriously they’re taking this,” he said.

U.S. forces also used Apache AH-64 attack helicopters for the first time over the weekend to strike ISIL militants near Fallujah. Helicopters are more vulnerable to small arms fire and missiles than warplanes.

“[The Obama administration’s] sort of doing this slow-motion escalation,” Hsieh said. “I don’t know if they’re thinking all this through.”

Commander Elissa Smith, a Pentagon spokeswoman, defended the Obama administration’s strategy against ISIL in an emailed statement.

“Our airstrikes have been effective in achieving our goal of degrading and ultimately destroying ISIL,” she said. “It is important to remember that this is a long campaign, and we have been clear that it will take time to roll ISIL back.”

Smith added that there will soon be about 1,600 military personnel in Iraq, but “the Defense Department has said that there won’t be any ground combat forces and we don’t comment on future operations.”

However, some analysts say Obama’s strategy still does not match his stated goal of eliminating ISIL.

Michael Rubin, resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a former Pentagon adviser on Iran and Iraq during the George W. Bush administration, said in an email that the United States’ current anti-ISIL efforts are “long on symbolism and short on substance.”

“To avoid targeting ISIL forces attacking Kobani is like Franklin Delano Roosevelt declaring war on Japan, and then concentrating the American attacks on Argentina,” Rubin said. “What we have is war as a neighborhood organizer would fight it, not as anyone who knows anything about the military or the Middle East or simply the real world would advise.”