Posted on 09/19/2017 4:21:29 PM PDT by BeauBo
Even Western mainstream media sources are now coming to realize and report on the sheer extent of the destruction that has been bestowed upon Raqqa. To this end, one particular Western journalist has noted that the urban devastation inflicted on the city exceeds that seen in Mosul and Aleppo.
(Excerpt) Read more at almasdarnews.com ...
Our Kurdish and SDF allies on the ground have cleared about 70% of the city in 100 days of urban combat, and recently rather quickly swept through the main security area of the downtown. It seems as though the toughest parts have been taken, and the pace is picking up, as ISIS falls apart.
That’s how you take a Urban center with minimal loss of life for the attacking side. You blow it apart building by building.
“minimal loss of life for the attacking side.”
Last month (Aug), our allied Infantry on the ground (Kurds and SDF) achieved a better than 10 to 1 kill ratio against ISIS - on the attack, against well prepared defenders in an urban environment.
The tactics have been dialed in against ISIS, and there is not a damn thing they can do to stop what it coming for them. The US-led coalition has been willing to drop a hundred artillery rounds rather than risk an Infantryman’s life probing for booby traps, or send in an airstrike for a single sniper.
Where the ISIS Caliphate rose up, ruins remain in their wake.
>Last month (Aug), our allied Infantry on the ground (Kurds and SDF) achieved a better than 10 to 1 kill ratio against ISIS - on the attack, against well prepared defenders in an urban environment.
Wow, that’s spectacular. Weren’t losses in Mosul closer to 50/50 for Iraq troops and Obama era rules of engagement?
Seems a few heavy bombers could do the job cheaper, safer and faster.
I haven’t seen the same stats on how the various Iraqi forces performed in Mosul, but that was a truly grinding operation - the largest Urban battle since Stalingrad in WWII. They definitely had to sacrifice more per ISIS scalp, although it was still better than average ratios for such an operation. The Iraqis had complete air superiority, dominant artillery, and lots of heavy armor - and Mosul shows the effects as well, with billions of dollars of destruction, just to the utilities.
Even when Obama was still in office, things changed like day and night when the new CENTCOM Commanding General, Joe Votel, took command. Within two months, major operations were launched, and airstrikes started in earnest. That was the main change, although things have accelerated even more since Trump took office.
Things are always different, and I don’t want to take away any of the well deserved respect that Iraqi Security Forces earned in that epic struggle, but it is clear that the Kurds and SDF are exceptionally effective infantry - in Kobane, in Manbij, and now in Raqqa. Their Special Forces trainers often comment on how they are substantially different from what they usually see - they are ready and willing to go fight without cajoling.
And what did we gain by destroying these cities? The refugees are not going home. We still have cheap oil.
What was the US national interest in Raqqa?
I am all for defending threats against us...but this did not threaten us.
not good enuff...stuff is still standing...
Innocent people lived in that city. Where did they go and what do they do now that there are no homes to return to....or a city for that matter.
B-b-b-but what about Aleppo? Hundreds of thousands of babies were butchered by Assad right?
Ramadi Iraq was almost at Hiroshima levels of destruction after the latest US bombing campaign. The Syrian town on the border of Turkey, Kobani, totally flattened by US bombs. Now I believe that’s justified to fight ISIS. So do some of the non-ISIS supporters who got their homes blown up and are still alive. Others may not feel that way.
The issue is how the MSM has a dishonest propaganda narrative that evil Syrian and Russian bombs only kill innocent babies but US bombings of cities are never criticized and barely mentioned. Occasionally, the US liberal globalist media whines about some specific bomb that killed some people, but they treat it as an aberration and they still avoid discussing the over all picture.
It creates a distorted perception among the American public about how the rest of the world sees these conflicts. And that distorted perception feeds into support for bad policy decisions.
When this ISIS unpleasantness is over, we need to get out of Iraq and Syria and not destabilize Syria again. Without the destabilization of Syria with billions worth of weapons and training for rebels, ISIS would never have emerged as a powerful army controlling it’s own territory.
“And what did we gain by destroying these cities?”
Rid of ISIS.
Genocide, Slavery, World Conquest, Terrorist directing against the West ISIS. Remember how their “Inspire” publication issued instructions on bomb-making and terrorist attacks, like “How to make a bomb in the kitchen of your Mom.” That was the pressure cooker bomb design used by the Boston Marathon bombers. Remember the terrorists attacks in American cities, where they carried ISIS flags in their pockets (San Bernadino, Pulse Night Club and others), not to mention cities in Europe and around the world.
Conventional military operations through cities was the cost of rooting out ISIS, after it had been allowed to grow into a virtual terrorist Nation State, governing millions of people and a Major City, and expanding to other continents (e.g. Libya, Nigeria, The Philippines).
Thank God that brave men were willing to step up and take on these monsters, and do what needed to be done.
I salute those who had the balls.
“Innocent people lived in that city. Where did they go and what do they do now that there are no homes to return to”
Refugee camps were established (Ain Issa), and many dispersed to relatives and friends in the region. Many may not be able to return, due to the housing stock being reduced, but basic repairs and construction are much less expensive over there than here.
A lot of effort was put into warning the civilians with flyers and radio, and providing cover and transportation for them to evacuate. ISIS had a deliberate policy of forcibly keeping the civilians as human shields, but they were less effective in Raqqa than in Mosul. Nasty business, dealing with monsters.
“Without the destabilization of Syria with billions worth of weapons and training for rebels, ISIS would never have emerged as a powerful army controlling it’s own territory.”
That, and then pulling the US Troops out of Iraq and throwing that larger and wealthier country to the dogs.
It is true that the propaganda folks will always stick dead baby photos into the public’s face, to try to get their enemy to lose their will to fight, and gain victory that way.
It is tough business, and men must steel themselves to do what must be done, when evil is on the march.
Don’t mistake my distaste for our government sending good men and women to chase down those thugs as a lack of respect for the soldiers.
If we hadn’t sent all the guns from Libya to Syria, we would not have gotten in that mess. And what do we have to show for it? A bigger mess.
“If we hadn’t sent all the guns from Libya to Syria, we would not have gotten in that mess. And what do we have to show for it? A bigger mess.”
It was the Obama Administration policy, not the rest of us. In my opinion, it was deliberate sabotage of American interests, by insiders.
It is a huge mess - truly epic. Cities in ruins, the largest refugee movement since WWII, genocide, ethnic cleansing, destruction of the oldest Christian communities on Earth - not just some policy faux pas.
This titanic human catastrophe which has devastated that region and sent its effects around the world was not business as usual for the US - it was a radical departure from US policy, conducted by a small cabal of Leftists who temporarily gained power.
There is a horrible human cost to voting Democrat in the USA, now that they have been co-opted by the hard communist left, and thrown in with the most brutal islamist extremists to support their plans for consolidating power.
Having troops in Iraq would not be necessary had a massive, US lead effort to destabilize Syria not been executed.
More importantly, Iraq demanded that we leave. If we had tried to stay, we would have been attacked by the entire Arab population. It would have been a disaster. Leaving was inevitable.
Anti-American Iran (still chanting “Death to America” after all these years) is a big reason why US troops in Iraq would be needed in any case - well helpful anyway. But the big reason is that the Americans were the best honest brokers available to stabilize Iraq, after a generation that knew only brutal dictatorship.
Iraq only failed to sign a Status Of Forces Agreement (SOFA) with the US, because they were not seriously negotiated with. They always drive every negotiation past the final deadline - carpet-dealing style hard driving haggling is just part of the National character. The Americans just suddenly said “OK”, and walked away.
Bottom Line: The Obama Admin pretended to lose the negotiation, because they wanted to pull out. They announced a withdrawal date, and rebuffed overtures to re-engage on negotiations.
The Iraqis saw they were going to be abandoned to Iran’s tender mercies, so few would speak out in favor of a SOFA after that. Many in Iraq wanted the Americans to stay.
The joke was that the Kurds say they wanted the Americans to stay, and they meant it. The Sunnis would say they wanted the Americans to go (being PC), but they did not mean it (they feared Shia and Iranian abuse - which occurred). The Shia would say that they want the Americans to stay (grateful for liberating them from Saddam), but they really didn’t (they wanted the freedom to run roughshod over the others). There is a lot of truth to that joke, but a lot of the Middle class and wealthy Shia really wanted the Americans to stay too, because they saw the alternative as corrupt and religiously extreme Iranian infiltration/domination (which is occurring). Many with family members overseas, or patriotic returning ex-pats recognized that American mentorship gave Iraq a chance at a modern Western-style society/Government, and wanted that.
Radical Shi’ites who led groups of street thugs from the slums (like Muqtada al Sadr), and those militia leaders with financial, military, intelligence, and assassin backing from the Iranian regime have a disproportionate voice in Shi’ite politics in Iraq, and try to silence other voices by any means. A strong American presence (and little else) could have kept a check on that, but Obama decided to throw them all to the dogs (after releasing a flood of all the worst killers and ringleaders onto the streets from the Camp Bucca Confinement Facility).
Iraq had stabilized and was rebuilding. Obama scuttled it, and sent it back into its worst sectarian violence, and the worst physical destruction that Iraq has endured in the modern era - far worse than “Shock and Awe”. Whole cities have been mostly destroyed in the Sunni/Shia civil war with ISIS, ancient Christian and Yezidi communities were devastated, and graveyards filled. Those who supported America, and Western values, have been the hardest hit - often systematically murdered in great detail.
The “Arab Spring” Obama policies of supporting Muslim Brotherhood takeovers across the Middle East and North Africa, including covert support of jihadis in Syria, as well as abandoning or Iraqi allies has been the great disaster of the 21st century to date.
Obama’s abandonment of Iraq was even more disastrous for them, than the abandonment of Vietnam was for the South Vietnamese - and that is saying a lot.
That is why to founders put the responsibility into the hands of Congress. But they want the military contracts, but none of the blame.
If the congress declared war, I would support their decision. But, that will never happen again.
Thank you for the synopsis.
You can’t tell the players without a program!
You are totally insane if you think we could have stayed in Iraq. It would have been a full blown war with the entire Arab population. They wanted us out. They were serious about that.
You again fail to think realistically about how people react to foreign soldiers from another race and religion occupying their country. Why didn’t you address that point?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.