Mediaboss Marketing

Abu Moussa al-Muhajer, not pictured, has reportedly been killed (Picture: AFP/Getty Images)

A British Isis fighter known as the sniper of the caliphate has reportedly been killed in Iraq.

Abu Moussa al-Muhajer is said to have died while patrolling a motorway near the town of Tal Afar, after being shot by unknown gunmen.

Tal Afar is around 50 miles away from Mosul, the former de-facto capital of Isis in Iraq before it was officially liberated earlier this week.

Government forces have now surrounded Tal Afar which remains one of the last areas of Isis control in Iraq.

An anonymous source speaking to Al Sumeira said that Muhajer was attacked alongside an Australian militant, who was wounded.

Abu Moussa al-Muhajer gained his fame from his sharp remote sniping skills, which earned him the sniper of the caliphate title, the source said.

They added that there were around 20 to 30 British nationals fighting for Isis in Tal Afar, some of whom occupy senior positions within the group.

Lt Gen Stephen Townsend, commander of US forces in Iraq, told Military.com that once Mosul is fully secure Tal Afar would be the coalitions next target.

They will then take on Isis in Hawija, in the Kirkuk province north of Baghdad, and in areas of the western Anbar province.

How long it takes, I wouldnt guess, he said. Well be at it til its done.

Original post:
British Isis fighter nicknamed 'sniper of the caliphate' has been 'killed in Iraq' - Metro

Vehicles of the 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division line up for the departure of the final convoy of US military forces out of Iraq at Camp Adder near Nasiriyah, Iraq, Dec. 17, 2011. (photo byREUTERS/Lucas Jackson)

Author:Jack Detsch Posted July 13, 2017

The Donald Trump administration is pushing Congress for the authority to build new temporary facilities in Iraq and Syria as part of the US-led campaign against the Islamic State.

In a policy statementreleasedTuesdaynight, the White House argues that US troops are hamstrung by legal restrictions on their ability to expand US military infrastructure in both Iraq and Syria. The administration wants lawmakers to extend existing authorities that only cover the repair and renovation of facilities to also encompass temporary intermediate staging facilities, ammunition supply points, and assembly areas that have adequate force protection.

These facilities, supply points, and assembly areas will enable the pursuit of [IS] into theEuphrates River Valleyand help improve the security of Iraqs borders, the statement reads. Current authorities severely limit the coalitions maneuverability and its ability to respond quickly to changing operational conditions.

TuesdaysStatement of Administration Policy, which the White House uses to present its views on pending legislation, takes the House Armed Services Committee to task for not including the change in its annual defense authorization bill released last month, although it is not clear if lawmakers had received the request from the Pentagon in time. The Senate Armed Services Committeedraft, released this week, does, however, include the requested change. The House began floor consideration of the billWednesday.

The added flexibility would enable the Defense Department to go on the offensive to root out IS safe havens in Iraq and Syria, according to Corri Zoli, the director of research at Syracuse Universitys Institute for National Security and Counterterrorism.

It looks to me like what theyre trying to do is get a little more maneuverability to create some infrastructure for deepening the fight beyond Raqqa and Syria, Zoli told Al-Monitor. Its kind of an attempt to create a lily-pad structure in the Levant to go after [IS] and their entrepreneurial efforts to start miniature caliphates in the region.

Defense Secretary JamesMattis, Zoli added, is thinking a couple steps ahead. He wants to win the peace, stabilize the regionand militarily pressure Iran. If he can do it with logistics all the better.

But detractors say the effort could further draw the United States into Syrias complex civil war, even as Congress continues toresistlaunching a full-fledged debate over updating the 2001 use of force authorization that remains the main legal justification for US involvement in the region.

The concerning part is how this fits in with the bigger picture, said Kate Gould, the lead Middle East lobbyist at the Quaker group Friends Committee on National Legislation. The US is shooting down Syrian warplanes and Iranian-made drones and launching cruise missile attacks. It opens the spigot for them to establish those kinds of facilities and further entrench the US military presence in Syria for this unauthorized war.

TuesdaysWhite House statement comes as the US-led coalition in Iraq and Syria looks to accelerate military operations against IS.Earlier this week,Lt. Gen. Stephen Townsend, the US commander leading the effort, saidthe campaign is now expected to expand into the Euphrates River Valley after Iraqi forces retook Mosul last week. Townsend acknowledged that a continued US military force presence in the region could include the use of temporary facilities set up on an ad hoc basis,such as those proposed by the administration, but would mostly draw upon existing bases.

While Pentagon officials have publicly downplayed the need for more outposts in Iraq and Syria, the move would shift away from defense authorization bills going back nearly a decade. Those bills largely sought to remove language associated with nation-building andcreate limits on foreign military interventions following the public backlash against the war in Iraq.

The 2008 defense authorization bill signed into law by President George W. Bush first sought to limit funding for permanent basing in Iraq following the signing of abilateral status of forces agreementthat called for the removal of American troops by 2011. Congress reaffirmed those limits in the 2012 and 2015 defense bills, providing some authority for stability operations, but retaining boundaries on permanent basing.

Read More: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2017/07/pentagon-build-bases-facilities-iraq-syria.html

View post:
Pentagon wants to build new US facilities in Iraq, Syria - Al-Monitor

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs has commissioned its first major study of whether men and women who served in America's most recent wars passed on any health problems to their children or grandchildren.

Researchers with the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine will hunt for any research that suggests soldiers who fought in the first Gulf War, the post-9/11 Iraq war and Afghanistan might have passed on any medical conditions to their descendants.

"We are evaluating whether there is any evidence out there. And if there isnt, then lets design recommendations that can help acquire that kind of data in the most effective and meaningful way," says Dr. Kenneth Ramos, chair of the committee overseeing the study.

The VA is required by law to explore potential connections between military service and negative health outcomes. Previous government studies have looked into whether veterans of the Gulf War and those on active duty since 9/11 suffered health problems after their service; the new study will be the first step in an effort to evaluate their children and grandchildren.

"The government takes these reports to heart and utilizes them to guide and inform decisions," Ramos says. "It influences their ability to make decisions regarding a path forward."

With veterans of the Gulf War, Iraq and Afghanistan concluding their service so recently, many havent had time to have grandchildren. Thats partly why the committee is launching the study now, he says.

"Because not enough data is available, how do we ensure that we can position ourselves to be acquiring the kind of findings and data that we need to be able to generate the information thats required?" says Ramos.

The committee wont limit itself to examining any particular health outcomes, says Ramos. But it will pay special attention to conditions linked with exposure to solvents, pesticides and certain metals.

"The reality is that these are things that to a lesser or greater degree everyone is exposed to," he says. "But because of the nature of the conflict itself and the activities of military personnel, then they become agents of interest. Disposal of residues, burning of trashthose are things that might actually influence extensive exposure."

The results of the two-year study are expected in 2019.

During the 1990-91 Gulf War, U.S. troops were exposed to chemical and biological weapons and particulates from burning oil wells. Veterans have continued to complain of health problems more than 25 years later. Commonly-reported symptoms include chronic fatigue, headaches, joint pain and memory problems.

Some Gulf War soldiers also used tank armor and some bullets containing depleted uranium. According to the VA, if a a large amount of depleted uranium enters a person's body through ingestion or a wound, it may affect the kidneys.

In a 2016 study, the National Academies found evidence of a causal relationship and/or association between Gulf War service and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and Gulf War illness (generalized anxiety, depression, fatigue, gastrointestinal issues). They foundlimited/suggestive evidence of an association for Lou Gehrig's Disease (ALS) and fibromyalgia.

Ramos chaired the 2014 biannual committee on Agent Orange exposure during the Vietnam War. In that study, researchers found no evidence of medical disorders in exposed veterans children.

As part of the new study, researchers will collect veterans feedback at a public meeting in September.

See original here:
VA to study health effects of Gulf War, Iraq and Afghanistan on vets' families - 89.3 KPCC

As the battle of Mosul reaches its end, President Trump must decide how to proceed in Iraq. Both the U.S. and Iraqi governments rhetoric indicate American troops will withdraw after Mosul has been recaptured. However, that would leave the country vulnerable to Iranian influence. U.S troops should remain in Iraq to secure its territory and government from external threats.

Iran has tried to increase its influence in Iraq since the withdrawal of U.S. troops in 2011. Tehran has extended its reach through Shia militias loyal to the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Khamenei. These militias have fought alongside Iraqi security forces and Kurdish troops against ISIS to claim territory, not help civilians, and many of them have political wings that seek to align Iraqs government with Irans political and religious structure.

Since 2016, the U.S. has invested over $10 billion and an additional $4.83 billion in the fiscal year 2017 budget to combat ISIS. Currently, there are more than 5,000 U.S. troops and 3,500 coalition advisers to train 65,000 Iraqi soldiers, police, Kurdish troops, and Sunni tribal fighters. The U.S. should continue to support the Iraqi government as it rebuilds. This will help regional partners and the U.S. protect their interests. If the U.S. withdraws, Baghdad may become a puppet of Tehran, making the rest of the region susceptible to Iranian control.

Irans funding and logistical support of Iraqi Shia militias commonly referred to as the Popular Mobilization has aided in the effort to defeat ISIS. However, the Popular Mobilizations involvement has also led to increased sectarian violence in recaptured areas. In addition, it has delegitimized Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadis sovereignty over the security forces. These militants refuse to take orders from the Iraqi government, and only respond to directions given by Irans Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

The U.S. withdrawal of troops from Iraq would be an invitation for Iran to create a base of control to threaten U.S. partners in the region. Currently, Iraqi security forces lack the manpower and resources to secure recaptured territory. Troops are centered in Mosul, leaving the rest of the country vulnerable and unprotected. This not only makes Iraq vulnerable to an ISIS resurgence, but also allows the Shia militants free reign over unfortified areas. Iran could take control of recaptured areas through its militias and implement its own rule of law on the inhabitants. Fighting between the Iraqi security forces and the militants would likely cause a drastic surge in sectarian violence, risking civilian lives and worsening the refugee crisis.

A number of groups in Iraq, including from the prime ministers party, support a closer relationship with Tehran. Some powerful Shia political parties receive funding and support from Iran and aim to bring the two countries closer together. They are seeking a leader who will distance the country from U.S. influence. One such individual is Nouri al-Maliki, Iraqs former prime minister. Maliki insisted on the withdrawal of U.S. troops in the late 2000s and gave top government and military positions to favored Shiites, denying rights and representation to other communities in Iraq.

Without U.S. support, the Iraqi government will lose the limited control and legitimacy it has, placing U.S. security and economic interests in jeopardy. A pro-Iran leader in Iraq would hurt U.S. efforts to combat terrorism in the region and strain its economic relationship with Iraq. Much like Iran is able to threaten Israel via its proxy, Hezbollah, in Lebanon, establishing a hold over Iraq would aid its wars in Yemen and Syria against U.S. partners like Saudi Arabia, and further destabilize the region.

During the presidential campaign, Trump repeatedly stated his commitment to combatting Irans influence in the Middle East. In an interview with the Washington Post, then-candidate Trump remarked, Iran is taking over Iraq as sure as youre sitting there. In a campaign speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee last March, Trump stated Iran is a problem in Iraq, a problem in Syria, a problem in Lebanon, a problem in Yemen and will be a very, very major problem for Saudi Arabia. U.S. policy needs to reflect the accuracy of Trumps assessment.

The Trump Administration must renew its presence in Iraq to prevent a resurgence of conflict and protect the country from Iranian influence. Two programs provide funding for the U.S. to advise and assist in Iraq and Syria: the Iraq Train and Equip program and the Counter ISIL fund. Congress needs to renew these programs in 2018 to fund the security forces. President Trump should also encourage other members of the Counter-ISIS coalition to commit more funding and logistical support for security forces.

The administration should also increase funding for the Air Forces F-15 and F-16 fighter jet programs, which have been highly effective in targeting ISIS. If President Trump is to follow through in his pledge to stand up to Iran's aggressive push to destabilize and dominate the region, he must commit to securing territories and the U.S. relationship with Iraq.

Read more here:
The Battle For Iraq Doesn't End With MosulOr ISIS - The National Interest Online (blog)

He continued: We are not the reason Iraq is falling apart. I think Iraq is a fabricated state. It was built on the wrong foundations.

And then there is Syria. The civil war across the border, as much as the sectarian policies of the former prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, helped the Islamic State regenerate in Iraq after its predecessor, Al Qaeda in Iraq, was largely eradicated. The group was able to expand into Syria before sweeping across the border in 2014 and taking Mosul.

Without peace in Syria, officials say, there is little chance for peace and stability in Iraq.

Syria and Iraq are closely connected, Mr. Maliki said in an interview this year. If the situation in Syria is unstable, Iraq will be unstable.

When asked about the future of Iraq after the Islamic State, Mr. Maliki said: The state cannot control the situation. The coming phase will be bad.

With the larger questions hanging over the country, the immediate challenge of stabilizing Mosul is monumental, especially in the citys west side. The fight has essentially turned the city into two, divided by the Tigris River. The west is a gray, dusty wasteland of flattened buildings and upturned, charred trucks; even the windows of the cars civilians are driving have been blown out. Cross the bridge, though, and suddenly the world emerges in light and color, with shops and restaurants open, and loud traffic jams.

Fighting continued on Monday in a small patch of the old city, and security forces there rescued two more girls from Iraqs Yazidi religious minority who had been held as sex slaves. The United Nations, meanwhile, put out an urgent call for funding from other nations to help the nearly 700,000 civilians still displaced from the fighting.

All day long on Monday, Iraqi state television played patriotic songs in honor of the security forces, and later in the evening, a news flash alerted that Mr. Abadi would make a historic speech, surrounded by soldiers. The prime minister, once again, declared victory in Mosul, saying, Iraq is now more united than ever, and he declared Tuesday a national holiday of celebration.

In the skies over Mosul, Iraqi airplanes dropped three million leaflets on a city where many of the residents are no longer there.

Each leaflet showed a map of Mosul in the colors of the Iraqi flag red, white and black with the message: Mosul has been returned to the bosom of Iraq.

Falih Hassan contributed reporting.

A version of this article appears in print on July 11, 2017, on Page A1 of the New York edition with the headline: Iraq Celebrates A Win in Mosul As Rifts Widen.

Read more here:
Iraq Celebrates Victory Over ISIS in Mosul, but Risks Remain - New York Times