Obama Has Been Helping ISIS by Pulling Punches
U.S. military pilots who have returned from the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq are confirming that they were blocked from dropping 75 percent of their ordnance on terror targets because they could not get clearance to launch a strike, according to a leading member of Congress.
Strikes against the Islamic State (also known as ISIS or ISIL) targets are often blocked due to an Obama administration policy to prevent civilian deaths and collateral damage, according to Rep. Ed Royce (R., Calif.), chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
How typically liberal to effectively side with the enemy while adopting a high moral tone. We can’t fight the people who are crucifying children and burying them alive because kids could get hurt.
The policy is being blamed for allowing Islamic State militants to gain strength across Iraq and continue waging terrorist strikes throughout the region and beyond, according to Royce and former military leaders…
ISIS would not even be in Iraq if Obama had not thrown away our hard-won victory there by prematurely withdrawing US troops. It might not be in Syria either if not for Obama’s counterproductive attempts to undermine Assad, who like those Obama has helped overthrow on behalf of radical Islamists (Gaddafi, Mubarak) is not up for sainthood but is vastly preferable to his likely replacement.
Jack Keane, a retired four-star U.S. general, agreed with Royce’s assessment of the administration’s policy and blamed President Barack Obama for issuing orders that severely constrain the U.S. military from combatting terror forces. …
“Believe me,” Keane added, “the French are in there not using the restrictions we have imposed on our pilots.”
That’s because even France under a socialist president is far more likely to take on the enemy than America under this appalling disgrace of an administration.
Some token attack on the Islamic State has to take place, or the T word (treason) would start being heard within the Beltway. So Obama drops leaflets to make sure the terrorists have plenty of time to clear out of harm’s way. No, I’m not kidding:
According to Bridget Johnson of PJ Media, actions taken by U.S. forces in the wake of the Paris massacre include an effort to interdict ISIS oil tanker traffic. U.S. aerial assets carried this out by bombarding the trucks with leaflets warning drivers that an air strike would follow within forty-five minutes. What followed was, evidently, not air strikes at all, but low-level buzzing by U.S. Navy fighter-bombers.
The excuse is to avoid hurting the truck drivers. However:
It’s not like these drivers are innocent, uninvolved “civilians” like children or sick people. They’re waging ISIS’s war, just like the other non-uniformed participants who make up 100% of ISIS’s ranks.
The rules of engagement for the token forces going through an expensive charade of pretending to fight ISIS are “the most restrictive in terms of rules of engagement that we have ever entered into in the last 25 years,” according to Keane. Considering the almost comical restrictions in Afghanistan, that is really saying something.
The ISIS response to Obama’s insistence on zero civilian casualties is easily predictable to anyone familiar with the way Muslims fight:
All it has to do is surround itself with civilians and it’s invulnerable. Just like the Taliban did in Afghanistan.
Everything Obama has done in the Middle East points to the same conclusion: he is sympathetic toward our worst enemies, which comes as no surprise to those familiar with his ideological background.
On tips from Stormfax, Dragon’s Lair, Bill T, Byron, and Nobama. Cross-posted at Moonbattery.