ISIS Driven out of Raqqua

The PYD got US support, but it was the PYD that did it.

 

Mosul as already falling before Trump was even elected and ISIS wasn’t in Aleppo.

How wrong can you be in a single post?

 

SF didn't just stay behind and not do nothing. Plus as mentioned Assad and the Russians also attacked Raqqa,

Mattis and McMasters caused the change in strategy. So Trump gets the credit.

 

Anyone else remember just a year ago when the Rightwing on this forum was advocating carpet bombing Raqqa?

Don’t let them take any credit or pride in “liberating people”. If the Right had their way, those people would be corpses.

 

A 19 year old isn't impressed? I bet you'd be impressed if it was your life being risked to clean out those tunnels.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4467862/The-hellish-aftermath-MOAB-revealed.html
The incredible destruction wrought by the US Army's MOAB - better known as the 'Mother of All Bombs' - has been revealed in new footage.

Dropped in Nangarhar Province, Afghanistan, on a mountain riddled with tunnels, the 21,600lb bomb successfully killed 94 ISIS militants, including four commanders, according to the Afghan army.

 

Meh....there would be more corpses if things are done the lefts way. Not to mention Daesh would still be putting out those videos of chopping someones head off. Throwing gays off the tops of buildings or lighting them on fire while in a cage.

Remember when BO peep called Daesh the JV Team and leftness thought that was so neat-o and cool like. While they still ran around killing innocent people.

 

Things were done the Lefts way. The Syrian Rebels with US support liberated Raqqa. That is exactly the strategy Obama started.

 

Yet what effort did he take to dislodge the JV team out of Raqqa? Why did Mattis have to get Trump to change the ROE from what it was under the Peep then?

 

Syrian forces are the primary fighters against ISIS, what the **** does our ROE have to do with them?

Syrian forces supported by Obama have been fighting towards Raqqa for a year. It takes time to liberate a city without murdering everyone in it. But the Right would have been okay with murdering everyone in it, so I can see why you wouldn’t understand that.

 

this is a scenario where siege tactics would have been perfect. just seal up the entrances and starve them.

 

Perhaps if you joined the military or majored in military history, you'll see the flaws in that strategy.

 

A lot.....and it explains why the outcomes have been more of a success.


Did Trump Beat ISIS?
Unlike Trump’s other boasts, the shift in the war occurred on his watch and after he changed the rules of engagement.




But when it comes to one of Trump’s boasts, it’s hard for even his sternest detractors to gainsay him. Try as they might to deny it, even the efforts of the New York Times to discount his assertion rings false. ISIS was still largely undefeated and in control of much of the territory of Iraq and Syria when Trump was sworn in before a non-record setting crowd. But only nine months into his administration, the Islamic State’s hold on these countries has dwindled, and after the liberation this week of Raqqa, Syria, capital of the Islamists’ caliphate, it’s fair to say that the group is being routed after years in which it held its own against coalition forces.

As with any war and, indeed, a great many other occurrences during any administration, the personal credit or blame that accrues to a president is widely exaggerated. The people winning this war are the U.S. air crews and special operators killing the terrorists as well as the coalition forces — principally local militias and the Kurdish Peshmerga fighters — who have paid for the ground won from the terrorists in blood. Trump didn’t personally beat ISIS anymore than Franklin Roosevelt beat Japan and Germany singlehandedly. Nor, on the other side of the ledger, were Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon solely to blame for the disaster in Vietnam. But that is how history and politics works, and if the current victories lead, as seems highly likely, to the collapse of the caliphate, the only reason to deny Trump his fair share of the credit is partisan politics and the personal animus most of the press harbors toward him.

The facts about the campaign against ISIS are just as clear-cut. When Trump took office, the U.S. had been mired in a discouraging stalemate in the fight against a group that Obama had initially dismissed as the “JV” terrorist team and therefore unworthy of his attention. Obama had little appetite for another Middle East war after he pulled U.S. forces out of Iraq. Having claimed that he had ended or wound down America’s wars, it took more than a year for him to admit that his Iraq bugout and refusal to intervene in the Syrian civil war — even to enforce his “red line” over Bashar al-Assad’s use of chemical weapons — had created a vacuum that ISIS filled. That reluctance seemed to carry over into U.S. efforts during the two years following Obama’s 2014 pledge to “degrade and ultimately destroy” the terrorist group as coalition forces made little headway against the enemy.

Trump loosened the rules of engagement to allow commanders in the field more authority in day-to-day decisions about fighting the enemy. Under Obama, the White House micromanaged the conflict in a manner that calls to mind the way President Lyndon Johnson and Defense Secretary Robert McNamara fought the Vietnam War with similar dismal results.

Yet none of that changes the fact that ISIS is being defeated on Trump’s watch and, at least in part, because of decisions he has made. There will be plenty that happens during his presidency for which he will deserve to be blamed but, his boasts notwithstanding, this victory also belongs to him.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/452868/trump-isis-victory

 

The “shift in the war” already occurred long before Trump was elected. ISIS has been on the retreat for two years and their biggest losses and casualties occurred under Obama.

“Discouraging stalemate” is a massive ****ing lie. Just look at maps of ISIS territory and how much they have lost since 2013. Stalemate it was anything but.

 

In January, ISIS controlled 23,300 square miles. Today it holds onto about 9,300 square miles. Trump’s role in the transformation is not insignificant.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/452868/trump-isis-victory


No it didn't.....as it stated the Peep was micro managing the war. It was stagnated. Trump changing the EOs and our people on the ground calling the shots Turned it all around.

 

How much territory did they control in December 2013 and how much did it in December 2016?

Claiming there was a stalemate is a massive lie. You have to ignore literally all of the battles that have occurred in the last 3 years to make that claim.

So are you claiming there was a stalemate and in January ISiS controlled all the land it had conquered in 2013? Is that your claim?

 

In 2014, ISIS controlled more than 34,000 square miles.

In your own words, in January, they controlled 23,000.

But by all means, continue lying and claiming there was a stalemate.

 

I don't need to lie.....use that brain for a change and google up Bo peeps Failure with Syria. Then Google up why the Peeps Foreign Policy was a failure.

Check into the references of Gates, Panetta, and Hagel. All 3 of the Peeps SOD's.

Then let me know when you are in tune with reality and that filter is working.

 

Why do you deliberately leave out Iraq and only bring up Syria? Was ISIS only located in Syria?

 

Because Raqqa is in Syria and that is where they established their Caliphates capitol....Iraq is also a peep failure. Ask the Kurds.

Also.....hence the Peeps Foreign Policy being a failure. Those re-pivots should have been a major clue for you.

Also, there is the fact that this thread is on Syria.

 

Would those be the same Kurds who under Obama’s watch liberated Kirkuk and drove ISIS out of Kurdistan?

Are you claiming the battles of Ramadi, Tikrit, Fallujah, and Mosul never happened?

 

Did BO peep cause the problem of Daesh breaking out of Iraq? Oh and when did they finish up taking Mosul, and who again changed the ROE's?

You didn't think Mattis only considered those ROE's for Syria alone did you?

 

How exactly did a change of ROE of US forces change the Iraqi army’s liberation of Mosul?

90% of Mosul was liberated before Trump was even elected.

 

You were already given this answer.

Trump loosened the rules of engagement to allow commanders in the field more authority in day-to-day decisions about fighting the enemy. Under Obama, the White House micromanaged the conflict in a manner that calls to mind the way President Lyndon Johnson and Defense Secretary Robert McNamara fought the Vietnam War with similar dismal results.....snip~

 

Btw.....you do need to visit that Mosul timeline again.


ISIS defeat in Mosul expected within weeks; coalitions ...
www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/mar/6/isis-defeat-in-mosul...
Mar 06, 2017 · Coalition forces make quick progress in Mosul; ISIS defeat


Whats that date again? Who was President? Who gets the credit as he does for Syria?

Thas Right.....Trump!

 

Oh for heaven's sake, what is the MSM feeding you. The Syrian army together with Hezbollah, Iran and the Russian planes freed over 90% of Syria... and they had to fight the American supported terrorists as they were doing it.