On Thursday the Senate voted to approve a controversial spending bill that gives President Obama new authority to confront ISIS.
The Hill reported that lawmakers voted 78-22 in favor of the bill, with 9 Democrats and 12 Republicans voting “no,” along with one independent.
The authorization was wrapped in a stopgap bill which would have prevented a government showdown on Oct 1st, but included the provision which gives Obama the authority to arm, train rebel fighter in Syria.
The Hill continued to report anti-war liberals and some conservatives balked at that request, with some fearing the vote represented a dangerous march to war. The House approved adding the Syria provision to the stopgap bill Wednesday in a 273-156 vote, with more than 80 Democrats breaking with the president to reject his request.
Lawmakers skeptical of helping the rebels are fearful that it could be difficult, if not impossible, for the administration to ensure the weapons do not end up in the wrong hands.
Many lawmakers complained how the vote took place and should have had its own standalone vote.
Now the real hard part takes place! Right now there is a debate between U.S. military leaders and the Obama administration over whether U.S. military forces will be in a combat role.
The New York Times reported Pentagon officials are more willing than their counterparts at the White House to acknowledge that this will almost certainly require American Special Operations forces on the ground to call in airstrikes and provide tactical advice to Iraqi troops. “There is no one in this building who does not know that clearing out the cities will be much harder,” a senior Defense Department official said in an interview. “That’s when the rubber is going to meet the road.”
The Times continued the United States is trying to institutionalize the Sunni tribal awakening by establishing new national guard units that it would have a crucial role in training and equipping. The idea is to avoid the need to send a largely Shiite army to Sunni areas and to win the allegiance of local Sunnis. In their attempt to seize urban areas from the Islamic State, the Iraqis’ firepower will be limited. On Saturday, Iraq’s new prime minister, Haider al-Abadi, said that the Iraqi military would not use artillery or carry out airstrikes in populated areas — an effort to reduce the risk of civilian casualties and avoid alienating the Sunni population.
A senior State Department official said Sunday that the Iraqi air force’s “targeting is not nearly as precise as ours, and they’ve made some real mistakes.”
“So that’s why Prime Minister Abadi yesterday announced that even in populated areas in which ISIL has control, we are not going to do airstrikes or artillery-type stuff because it could harm the civilians,” the official said.
President Obama has repeatedly stated no American combat forces will be used in Iraq. The problem is that the Obama and his administration have made conflicting statements if and when U.S. military forces would be used.
The Times reported In fact, General Austin said that air controllers would be needed. “He shares my view that there will be circumstances when we think that’ll be necessary, but we haven’t encountered one yet,” General Dempsey said of General Austin.
But the White House made clear on Wednesday that requests to use the advisers to call in airstrikes to provide tactical advice on the battlefield to Iraqi units would need to be approved by the president on a case-by-case basis.
In weighing such requests, the White House may have to choose between the increased risk to American personnel and the danger that without the use of advisers on the battlefield, the counteroffensive may stall.
The presidents strategy has numerous challenges with the first one how will he begin to train the Syrian rebels, how is he re-establishing the Iraqi army, how is he coordinating with the Kurdish fighter (Peshmerga). Will use military forces be calling in airstrikes, remember the White house has been giving conflicting signals on this.
The president still hasn’t gotten any by in from our allies or Arab nations in confronting ISIS. If they had countries to be part of the coalition they would have announced by now.
Confusion continuous in the president’s strategy!
Leave A Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.