Mediaboss Marketing

WASHINGTON

Sending thousands more American troops into Iraq or Syria in a bid to accelerate the defeat of the Islamic State group would push U.S. allies to the exits, create more anti-U.S. resistance and give up the U.S. military's key advantages, Defense Secretary Ash Carter said in an Associated Press interview.

Speaking from his Pentagon office overlooking the Potomac River on Wednesday, Carter said he favors looking for ways to speed up the counter-IS campaign, which administration critics including the president-elect, Donald Trump, have called slow-footed and overly cautious.

But he outlined numerous reasons why he believes strongly in the current approach of letting local Iraqi and Syrian forces set the pace.

"If we were to take over the war in Iraq and Syria entirely ourselves, first of all, in the near term it would be entirely by ourselves, because there is no one else volunteering to do that," he said. "We could get past that. But secondly, we would risk turning people who are currently inclined to resist ISIL" or to join ranks with the coalition, "potentially into resisting us, and that would increase the strength of the enemy."

Taking over the war also would amount to "fighting on the enemy's terms, which is infantry fighting in towns in a foreign country," he said. While U.S. troops can do that, it would not leverage the U.S. military's biggest strengths, which are special operation forces, mobility, air power and intelligence-gathering technologies "exquisite capabilities that no one else has," he said to enable local troops to do the fighting and own the outcome.

So while he believes faster is better, "It's important that it be done in a way that victory sticks." That was a reference to avoiding a repeat of the disastrous events of 2014, when Islamic State militants swept into western and northern Iraq from Syria and grabbed control of large swaths of territory as the Iraqi army collapsed. The Obama administration was caught by surprise at the hollowness of the Iraqi army, weakened by political and ethnic strife.

The AP interview was Carter's last as defense secretary. His designated successor, retired Marine Gen. James Mattis, is expected to win easy Senate confirmation shortly after Trump is inaugurated on Friday. Carter will step down at noon on Friday.

At his confirmation hearing last week, Mattis gave only glimpses of his thinking on Iraq and Syria. When asked how his recommended way forward there would differ from the current approach, Mattis said, "You give it full resourcing to get there as rapidly as possible, and I think it's getting there as rapidly as possible is probably where it would differ from the current administration, where it would be a more accelerated campaign from what the president-elect has already called for."

Trump has not explained his plan for defeating the Islamic State militants but has sometimes suggested he would send more troops.

The U.S. war against the Islamic State group, which began in 2014, the year before Carter took office, became a major focus of his tenure, along with his efforts to modernize the Pentagon's approach to recruiting and maintaining talent. He has often said Obama was open to every suggestion for devoting more resources to the war, short of committing large numbers of combat troops.

"Early on, we were very limited by the meager intelligence we had on ISIL," he said. "That limited how many bombs we could drop, because we didn't have targets, it limited where we could conduct raids, where we could vector forces, where we could try to create opposition to ISIL."

But as increasing amounts of territory have been recaptured in both Iraq and Syria, and growing numbers of ISIL leaders have been taken off the battlefield, the amount of useful intelligence has grown, he said.

"Even if you kill a guy, you get his phone and you learn something about ISIL," he said, adding that as the military campaign achieves more successes, "more and more people come over and volunteer information; that creates yet more opportunities. So there's this virtuous circle, where the more you do, the more you have opportunity to do even more."

Carter dismissed the idea that Obama has dragged his feet in Iraq or Syria.

"Everything we have been able to identify that would accelerate the defeat of ISIL, we have done," he said. "We have not been, and we should not be, shy about asking for more" authority or resources from the president to push the military campaign harder. "I asked President Obama for more. I would encourage Jim Mattis, if he sees opportunities to accelerate, to ask for more."

See more here:
Carter: more US troops will not fix Iraq or Syria - WPBF West Palm Beach

|

Posted: Jan 19, 2017 12:01 AM

President Barack Obama and his teamstillengage in a hissy fit over Donald Trump's questioning Obama's place of birth. To even raise the issue is to "otherwise" the first black President. In short, they argue, it is racist. But to claim that Vladimir Putin put Trump in the White House is nothing more than an obvious observation, right? When the Supreme Court ruled in favor of George W. Bush in 2000, a number of disgruntled Democrats referred to him as "President Select."

Now President-elect Trump is being hammered over his refusal to except the intelligence community's consensus about Russia's alleged role in the election. All of the intel agencies maintain that the Russian government attempted to influence our election, and that Russia preferred Trump over Hillary Clinton.

From the outset, Trump doubted both the argument that Russia hacked the Democratic National Committee and that the release of damaging emails was designed to give him an advantage over his rival. Trump, at least before his recent national security briefing, argued that the hacking could've been done by a number of actors, including China and other state and non-state entities. Trump's reluctance to accept the apparent unanimous opinion of our intel agencies probably has more to do with his rejection of the narrative that but for Russia he would not be president.

Russian President Vladimir Putin did not tell Clinton to put a private server in her basement in Chappaqua. Putin did not tell Clinton to delete 30,000 emails while arguing that they were not work related. He did not tell her to destroy evidence that was under subpoena. He did not tell her to falsely assert that she never sent or received classified information, or to falsely claim that she never sent or received information that was stamped classified.

Putin did not tell the DNC to ridicule the name of a black woman or to condescendingly suggest that the way to get Hispanic votes was through "brand loyalty" and "stories" because, after all, "Hispanics are the most responsive to 'story telling.' Brands need to 'speak with us.'" Nor did Putin get Hillary Clinton campaign Chairman John Podesta to agree that the Iran deal is "the greatest appeasement since Chamberlain gave Czechoslovakia to Hitler."

But the "Trump doesn't respect the intel community" argument raises another issue. Why doesn't Obama get the same criticism for rejecting his national security and intelligence team's advice on Iraq?

As a candidate, Obama called the Iraq War "dumb." He vowed to withdraw the troops and reposition them in Afghanistan -- the good war. As President, this is exactly what he did.

But he did so against the unanimous advice of the major national security voices in his administration.

Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton urged him to keep a stay-behind force. So did his secretary of Defense, the head of the CIA, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the United States ambassador to Iraq and his national security adviser.

Army Gen. Ray Odierno, former member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said shorty after his retirement that had there been a stabilizing force in Iraq, ISIS could've been dealt with: "I go back to the work we did in 2007 (through) 2010, and we got into a place that was really good. Violence was low, the economy was growing, politics looked like it was heading in the right direction. ... We thought we had it going exactly in the right direction, but now we watch it fall apart. It's frustrating that it's falling apart. ... I think, maybe, if we had stayed a little bit more engaged, I think maybe it might have prevented it."

Think about it. Obama, with barely two years of experience in the Senate, and no foreign-policy experience, rejected the unanimous advice of his mission security team. He pulled completely out of Iraq, a decision that aided and abetted the rise of ISIS.

Trump gets hammered for ignoring the unanimous opinion of the intelligence community; Obama makes one of the most consequential decisions by completely ignoring their advice. And, as usual, Obama gets a pass.

More here:
Trump 'Disrespects' the Intel Community? What About Obama's Iraq Bug-Out? - Townhall

The morning of 20 January 1992 began much like any other for the Mohammed family in the marshlands of southern Iraq. Rising at first light, they roused their herd of buffaloes and drove the beasts snorting and protesting into the surrounding wetlands to graze. After a quick breakfast of bread and yoghurt, washed down with sugary tea, they readied themselves for a long day out on the water.

But on that day, one of the coldest on record, five-year-old Hanaa and her mother caught no fish and gathered no reeds. No sooner had they paddled past the last of their neighbours floating reed houses than a squadron of government fighter jets emerged from the mist, guns blazing. They reduced the artificial islets to embers, and killed many of the buffaloes. Not content with shooting up a few villages as punishment for locals alleged harbouring of defeated Shia rebels, Saddam Hussein soon dispatched his engineers to divert the Tigris and Euphrates rivers away from the marshes. The effects were disastrous. By the turn of the last century, the Middle Easts largest wetlands had withered from a peak of 20,000 sq km to almost nothing.

There were no fish, no grasses, so of course we couldnt stay, remembers Hanaa, now in her 20s and a mother of four. The village just died.

However, in March this year, almost 25 years since she and her siblings were pushed off their land and into the slums of a nearby city, Hanaa and some of her former neighbours will be making a triumphant homecoming.

Authorities in Baghdad are rebuilding these lost communities. They are keen to resettle properly at least some of the roughly 250,000 Marsh Arabs who have trickled back to the area since it was partially re-flooded more than 10 years ago. At a time when some 3 million other Iraqis have been displaced by Isis-fuelled violence, officials see this as a crucial step in righting the wrongs of a previous conflict.

These are our marshes, theyre a key part of our heritage, and were doing everything we can to get the water to them to preserve them, said Hassan Janabi, the minister of water resources. In July, Iraqs marshes were listed as a Unesco world heritage site.

Last summer, the ministry sent in an excavator to dredge up tonnes of wetland mud and mould it into 43 islands. The soon-to-be-residents, all of whom lived here before it was drained, are building their own houses. Most turned to the old tribal sheikh for mediation in divvying up the properties.

Life in these picture-postcard villages could be tough and unforgiving. Few had schools, even fewer had a health clinic, and none had electricity. Its the memory of these less than idyllic conditions that appears to have persuaded many of the returnees to rebuild along the roads that Saddams army created through the marshes where the amenities are superior rather than chancing their luck out on the open water.

The new Ghubbah will be better laid out and equipped than its previous incarnation, local proponents of the plan say. With an entire island dedicated to infrastructure, notably a classroom and a water filtration system, it will boast facilities of which its former residents can be proud.

Many of them, particularly those who spent a decade in exile in neighbouring Iran, will just be pleased to return home. Everything we do from buffalo breeding to fishing is connected to the water, so its good to live in the middle of the water, said Haidar Hammeed, whose family have gone from one temporary lodging to another over the past few years. Its more practical.

Coming at a time of conflict and low oil prices, which has seen the ministry of water resources allocation from the states capital investment fund cut from $1.7bn (1.4bn) in 2013 to $90m (73m) in 2016, some wonder if this is the best use of scarce resources. But the minister and local NGOs insist this is no mere aesthetic exercise.

Ever since the Marsh Arabs were pushed into exile, their unique culture has been steadily eroded by more socially conservative norms. Where once they sang and danced at weddings, now they only serve food, says Jassim al-Asadi, director of Nature Iraqs southern operations and a native of the marshes.

Women once worked almost as equals in the marshes during their years away their role has changed. In the new towns along the military roads, some women are no longer allowed to work, while more are now dressed in niqabs.

Ultimately, though, there might not be much Baghdad or the people themselves can do to preserve the marshes in the long term. Turkey has built at least 34 large dams on the Euphrates and Tigris and their tributaries, which have reduced the amount of water reaching Iraq and, at the same time, reduced rainfall has affected the north of the country.

The regions unquenchable thirst might engineer what Saddam never did: a permanent destruction of the marshes.

Read the rest here:
Iraq's Marsh Arabs test the waters as wetlands ruined by Saddam are reborn - The Guardian

United States soldiers / AP

BY: Morgan Chalfant January 18, 2017 1:04 pm

A Republican lawmaker is pressing the incoming administration of Donald Trump to change the way that troop caps are formulated, arguing that current caps on service members in Iraq and Afghanistan are too low to achieve U.S. strategic objectives.

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (R., Mo.), who chairs theHouse Armed Services Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, sent aletterto Trump last Friday spotlighting the waythat the Obama administrations formulation of troop caps has negatively effected the readiness of the U.S. armed forces.

The executive branch establishes force management levelscommonly referred to as troop capsto limit the number of service members deployed in certain U.S. Central Command areas of responsibility. The Obama administration capped the number of service members in Afghanistan at 8,448 and those in Iraq at 5,262 for the start of 2017.

Those levels aretoo low given the military force necessary to achieve our nations strategic aims, Hartzler wrote in theletter to Trumpreleasedby her office on Tuesday. Hartzlerurged the president-elect to review the way that force management levels are formulated so that military discussions about desired end results inform the development of troop caps.

Last month, I led a hearing in my role as chairwoman of the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations to hear testimony on the readiness and strategic considerations of force management levels in Iraq and Afghanistan, Hartlzer wrote. Retired senior Army officers and outside experts confirmed concerns I held in regards to second order effects of the way in which the current administration has imposed these troop caps.

I urge your incoming administration, in conjunction with military leadership, to mindfully make force management level decisions with a clear understanding of resources needed to achieve the desired end result, Hartzler wrote. Deliberate civil-military discussions about that desired end result at the beginning of setting force management levels should then inform the subsequent [force management levels] imposed on our military, not the other way around.

Republican lawmakers have also urged the incoming administration toremove budget caps placed on defense spending by the 2011 Budget Control Act. Trump has indicated his willingness to do away with sequestration and rebuild the U.S. military.

Original post:
Trump Pressed to Review Troop Caps in Iraq, Afghanistan - Washington Free Beacon

TRAVIS AIR FORCE BASE One of the first things that Tech. Sgt. Christopher Queens family was going to have him do was to open the Christmas presents that have been waiting for him.

We even have a tree up, said Suzanne Queen, his wife. Then, later, we are going to my moms house where she is cooking Christmas dinner.

Maria Queen, their daughter, was carrying a sign that read Welcome home dad. Dont worry dad, I took care of mom. Now its your turn.

The plane carrying the contingent of about 35 airmen from the 821st Contingency Response Group of the 621st Contingency Response Wing landed just before 9:30 a.m. Wednesday at Travis amida drizzly rain.

When Tech. Sgt. Queen walked into the Global Mobility Deployment Center where the families were waiting, he expressed the common sentiment that all his returning peers had: Its just great to be home.

He also saidhe is not going to miss the dirt and dust that they lived in for the past three months while supporting the Iraqi campaign to retake Mosul.

They had handed off running the airfield atQayyarah West, located south of Mosul in Iraq, earlier this month to a contingent of the 123rd Airlift Wing of the Kentucky National Guard.

The Travis contingent originally expected to deploy for two months to reopen and run the airfield, but had their deployment extended to a third month, forcing them to miss Christmas with their families.

Qayyarah West Airfield had been captured in 2014 when fighters with the Islamic State groupswept across northern Iraq. Itwas recaptured in September by advancing Iraqi forces, but not before retreating Islamic State groupfighters had completely torn the place up.

They destroyed it so that the coalition could not use it again, said Col. Rhett Champagne, commander of the 821st Contingency Response Group, who deployed with theairmen.

Once the airfield was repaired by an engineering unit, the 621st Contingency Response Wing opened up operations Oct. 21 and kept things moving almost nonstop until Jan. 10, passing more than 1,423 tons of cargo through the airfield.

They did fantastic, Champagne said of the contingent. We reopened that airfield from nothing.

With the base serving as a major staging area for the ongoing assault on Mosul, coordinating airspace use between U.S. and Iraqi aircraft and helicopters, and coalition artillery was a major challenge, Champagne said.

Champagne saidthe 821st Contingency Response Group established airpower from the ground up at the airfield that included building command and control centers, configuringthe runway to serve fixed-wing aircraft and running operations in congested airspace.

Lt. Col. Blaine Bakers family was also waiting for him Wednesday with signs and hugs.

We are ready to have him home, said his wife, Jen Baker. We are just going to relax at home first, then go to Monterey.

This has been the seventh deployment for the Bakers. Jen Baker saidthey know what to expect, but that still does not make missing her husband any easier or welcoming him home any less sweet.

Reach Ian Thompson at 427-6976 or [emailprotected]. Follow him on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/ithompsondr.

19 travis

Members of the 821st Contingeincy Response Group return Wednesday to Travis Air Force Base after a three-month deployment in support of an operation targeting Islamic State. (Travis Air Force Base courtesy photo)

Continue reading here:
Travis welcomes airmen home from Iraq - Fairfield Daily Republic