Raqqa has fallen. The capital of the ISIS caliphate is no longer even partly in ISIS hands. This was the last significant city under the control of ISIS which at one time controlled nearly half of Syria and a third of Iraq. We ought to be celebrating that victory in the war against these Islamic terrorist thugs. So what's the focus of the media? If you guessed President Trump, you would be correct. The usual suspects (like CNN) are out with articles explaining that the President didn't really win the victory against ISIS because he supposedly just followed the same strategy as Obama. We can't take a moment to praise all those who fought against ISIS and won this victory? Not according to the media; we have to immediately try to keep the President from getting any credit for this.
The truth is not complicated. Obama did two important things: 1) He pulled all US troops out of Iraq quickly and left a vacuum there that ISIS quickly filled. Even as ISIS grew, Obama underestimated them, calling them just a jayvee terror group. 2) Once ISIS overran about a third of Iraq and threatened to take Baghdad, Obama got the USA involved in stopping ISIS. He slowly came to announcing the goal of the destruction and defeat of ISIS. He sent some US forces back to Iraq and fewer into Syria. He limited the role of the US forces, however, and kept operational control of the battles in Washington. As a result, progress was made against ISIS, but it was a slow slog with much suffering by Iraqis and Syrians under ISIS rule. When Trump took office, he announced the goal as the total destruction of ISIS. Then he made the key change: Trump gave battlefield control back to the commanders on the scene. If a target appeared for an airstrike, the local commander could call in planes without waiting for Washington to approve while the target moved away. What had been a slow move towards the destruction of ISIS became a much speedier process. The war against ISIS has lasted three and a quarter years. Trump has been in charge for about 20% of that time. During the period of Trump's leadership, however, there were about 40% of all of the ISIS fighters who have been killed or captured by the US and our allies. That is a major shift in the cadence of the march to victory. Trump does merit credit (great credit) for that.
And while we're talking about politics and the Middle East, we ought to mention Chuck Schumer. When Obama signed the JCPOA, Schumer was adamantly opposed to it. He didn't do anything that might have soured his chances of becoming the leader of the Democrats when Harry Reid retired, but he voted against the Iran deal and spoke about how it was a terrible deal for the USA. Now, President Trump has refused to certify the Iran is complying with the terms of that deal. What is Schumer's response? He's busy leading a charge to save the JCPOA, the same plan he voted against just a few years ago. Suddenly, this dangerous deal which would lead to Iranian nukes (according to Schumer two years ago) has to be saved from President Trump. The anti-Trump force is strong in this one. Of course, it's also the constant need to put politics about good policy for the American people that is strong with Schumer.
The truth is not complicated. Obama did two important things: 1) He pulled all US troops out of Iraq quickly and left a vacuum there that ISIS quickly filled. Even as ISIS grew, Obama underestimated them, calling them just a jayvee terror group. 2) Once ISIS overran about a third of Iraq and threatened to take Baghdad, Obama got the USA involved in stopping ISIS. He slowly came to announcing the goal of the destruction and defeat of ISIS. He sent some US forces back to Iraq and fewer into Syria. He limited the role of the US forces, however, and kept operational control of the battles in Washington. As a result, progress was made against ISIS, but it was a slow slog with much suffering by Iraqis and Syrians under ISIS rule. When Trump took office, he announced the goal as the total destruction of ISIS. Then he made the key change: Trump gave battlefield control back to the commanders on the scene. If a target appeared for an airstrike, the local commander could call in planes without waiting for Washington to approve while the target moved away. What had been a slow move towards the destruction of ISIS became a much speedier process. The war against ISIS has lasted three and a quarter years. Trump has been in charge for about 20% of that time. During the period of Trump's leadership, however, there were about 40% of all of the ISIS fighters who have been killed or captured by the US and our allies. That is a major shift in the cadence of the march to victory. Trump does merit credit (great credit) for that.
And while we're talking about politics and the Middle East, we ought to mention Chuck Schumer. When Obama signed the JCPOA, Schumer was adamantly opposed to it. He didn't do anything that might have soured his chances of becoming the leader of the Democrats when Harry Reid retired, but he voted against the Iran deal and spoke about how it was a terrible deal for the USA. Now, President Trump has refused to certify the Iran is complying with the terms of that deal. What is Schumer's response? He's busy leading a charge to save the JCPOA, the same plan he voted against just a few years ago. Suddenly, this dangerous deal which would lead to Iranian nukes (according to Schumer two years ago) has to be saved from President Trump. The anti-Trump force is strong in this one. Of course, it's also the constant need to put politics about good policy for the American people that is strong with Schumer.
No comments:
Post a Comment