Q: How is Obama's ISIS Strategy Going? A: Disastrously

But the State Dept. and White House used sad faces and hashtags! What could've gone wrong?!

Which is exactly how I and about 90% of those not smitten with Obama expected.

And tell me, where are the hashtags? I mean, how can these people understand how disapproving the Obama State Department is without some lame hashtag and sad faces?

From Ed Morrissey at Hot Air:

Not too much attention has been paid to our efforts to “degrade and destroy ISIS” in the past few days. Perhaps the White House can find something in this election cycle for which to be grateful, because this Washington Post report on our efforts to use proxies for that mission would otherwise dominate the news cycle. Not only has the US focused entirely on preparing our “moderate” allies in Syria for defense rather than attacking ISIS, they turned out to be incompetent even at that effort:

The Obama administration’s Syria strategy suffered a major setback Sunday after fighters linked to al-Qaeda routed U.S.-backed rebels from their main northern strongholds, capturing significant quantities of weaponry, triggering widespread defections and ending hopes that Washington will readily find Syrian partners in its war against the Islamic State.

It’s not just that they got defeated — some of them switched sides:

Moderate rebels who had been armed and trained by the United States either surrendered or defected to the extremists as the Jabhat al-Nusra group, affiliated with al-Qaeda, swept through the towns and villages the moderates controlled in the northern province of Idlib, in what appeared to be a concerted push to vanquish the moderate Free Syrian Army, according to rebel commanders, activists and analysts.
Other moderate fighters were on the run, headed for the Turkish border as the extremists closed in, heralding a significant defeat for the rebel forces Washington had been counting on as a bulwark against the Islamic State.

Michael Totten says that Syria is gone, and so is any hope of containing ISIS without boots on the ground:

They were bad proxies anyway. The Syrian Revolutionary Front was an Islamist organization. Less deranged than Al Qaeda and the Islamic State, sure, but it was still an Islamist organization. Harakat Hazm is more secular, but it consists of a measly 5,000 fighters while the Islamic State has as many as 100,000.
Syria is gone. The only portions of that former country that may still be salvageable are the Kurdish scraps in the north. The Kurds are good fighters and they may be able to hold on with our help, but there is no chance they will ever destroy the Assad regime or the Islamic State. They don’t have the strength or the numbers.
So unless the United States decides to invade outright with ground forces—and fat chance of that happening any time soon—we’re going to have to accept that the geographic abstraction once known as Syria will be a terrorist factory for the foreseeable future.  

[...]  

In other words, good luck trying to “degrade and destroy” ISIS through the weak proxies on either side of the former Iraqi-Syrian border. As Totten writes, until we decide that this mission is worth doing ourselves, it won’t get done at all — or will it? The AP reported today that Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait are considering the formation of a ground force to intervene in the conflict, which might help in Syria — but might touch off a bigger war, since those nations want to push Bashar al-Assad out of power, too, and counter the influence of Iran

So, we could very well see a major war triggered by Obama's stupid withdrawal of American troops from Iraq. And all of this to score some political points with Obama's Leftist base. Nice job.

It's odd that this Administration's two-pronged diplomatic strategy of putting pressure to the point of betrayal on Israel, while saying dumb and disingenuous crap to make Arabs feel better about themselves hasn't magically solved all the Middle East's problems. Weird.

Of course, the Left's interests do not lie in what's best for the US and its allies the Middle East. It's mostly about what will make the American Left feel better about themselves. Undoing Bush's work in Iraq, pulling out of Afghanistan, and releasing terrorists from Guantanamo has never been about "doing good," but is instead about righting the imperialism and arrogance Americans have shown under Bush. If this results in a major war, or mass killing, or terrorist attacks, or beheadings then so be it. In fact, it then gives them a chance to show how impotently compassionate they are with their #BringBackOurGirls and #UnitedForUkraine campaigns.

Report: ISIS Losing in Kobane Fight

Good news, if a BBC report of a Kurdish fighter is to be trusted. I hope and pray that it can.

From the BBC (via Ace of Spades):

The Islamic State (IS) militant group has been driven out of most of the northern Syrian town of Kobane, a Kurdish commander has told the BBC. 

Baharin Kandal said IS fighters had retreated from all areas, except for two pockets of resistance in the east. 

US-led air strikes have helped push back the militants, with another 14 conducted over the past 24 hours. 

Meanwhile, the new UN human rights commissioner has called IS a "potentially genocidal" movement.  

[...]  

Speaking by phone, Kurdish commander Baharin Kandal told the BBC's Kasra Naji that she hoped the city would be "liberated soon". 

Ms Kandal said her militia group had been receiving arms, supplies and fighters but she refused to say how, reports our correspondent, who is on the Turkish border near Kobane.  

Kurdish defenders have victory in their sights. After exactly a month of fighting, they say they have driven Islamic State from most of the city.  

[...]  

The battle for Kobane, which is also known as Ayn al-Arab, is regarded as a major test of whether the US-led coalition's air campaign can push back IS.

Well, the answer for that last bit is "no, an air campaign will not push back ISIS." In Kobane ISIS met stiff resistance from people who possessed no illusions about the consequences of an ISIS victory. ISIS's penchant for burying people alive, beheading, crucifixion, mass executions and public displays of the bodies hardened the resolve of the Kurds, rather than throwing them into a panic. The Kurds' response of throwing everyone who was willing into the fight (including the elderly, children, and women) against this terrible enemy, is both an admirable and an atypical response. It is unrealistic to expect any and all  people fighting ISIS to respond with the same heightened grit, determination, and heroism as the Kurds displayed in Kobane. Thus, the results cannot and will not be the same in future battles.

Basically, the U.S. air campaign will be effective only if all of the enemies of ISIS display heroic levels of courage and determination at all times. Sheer idiocy. An American general planning for a battle and who is expecting, or indeed relying upon, this level of desperation and requiring this amount of heroism from American troops is unreasonable-- and possibly criminal. Expecting constant heroism from loosely-organized, non-professional militias is ludicrous.

Yet, this seems to be the plans of the Obama Administration.

Utter foolishness...

UN: Syria Still Using Chemical Weapons Against Rebels and Civilians

"This has never been about trusting Asaad. It's about training and arming Islamic militants who may or may not be marching on Baghdad and Kobane. I mean international relations are like totally hard, okay?"

And this despite Obama's Operation "Oops I Said Red Line" which resulted in a "deal" brokered by our good friend Putin.

From The Washington Free Beacon:

Syria has revealed the existence of four chemical weapons facilities that were previously undisclosed, a top United Nations official said on Tuesday, raising new concerns about the government’s commitment to eliminating its chemical weapons under an agreement struck last year. 

Sigrid Kaag, a special representative of the U.N. secretary-general, reportedly told diplomats on the U.N. Security Council about the newly declared facilities at a closed meeting. Three of the facilities are for research and development and the fourth for production, but no new chemical agents are contained at the sites, according to the Associated Press report on Kaag’s comments. 

The disclosure of more facilities raises new questions about whether Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime might still be hiding parts of its chemical weapons program. Assad agreed to the removal and destruction of his chemical weapons as part of a deal brokered by the United States and Russia in September 2013, which followed the Syrian government’s alleged use of chemical agents on civilians in a Damascus suburb. About 1,400 people died in the August 2013 attack, including hundreds of children.  

[...]  

When asked by a reporter whether Assad could be trusted to declare all of his chemical weapons—given U.S. officials’ frequent claim that he has “lost all legitimacy to lead Syria”—Psaki [State Department Spokeswoman Jen Psaki] said it was more important to focus on U.S. efforts to train the Syrian opposition as an alternative to Assad.

Huh. So Assad still has and is using chemical weapons, and the U.S. State Department's response is to train and arm other fighter in the area... like ISIS maybe?

Gee, I wonder if this attitude/strategy could account for ISIS using American made ammunition, weapons, trucks, etc. Just thinking out loud here...

Observing Obama and his State Department flounder, flail, and generally act like children would be awfully amusing if the consequences weren't so terrible. This is like watching Public Access amateur hour...

"JV" ISIS Advances into Both Iraq and Syria

I hope our State Department is ready to hashtag out #FreeIraq or something...

Who could've predicted this? Certainly not Obama, who is intentionally being kept in the dark by the racist Secret Service.

From The Washington Free Beacon:

The United States appears to be losing its fight against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL or ISIS) in Iraq and Syria, experts say, as the jihadist group adapts to U.S. airstrikes and advances toward Baghdad and a strategic town on the Syrian-Turkish border. 

McClatchy reported on Friday that ISIL had established an operational presence in Abu Ghraib, a town within miles of the capital Baghdad that could enable the militants to shell the Baghdad International Airport with artillery. The airport serves as a key transit point for Western embassies and houses a joint operations center with U.S. military advisers. 

A Defense Department spokeswoman said there were no indications yet that ISIL had taken over Abu Ghraib. 

ISIL has also made significant gains in recent days in Iraq’s western Anbar province, where it has seized the town of Hit and launched assaults on other military bases in the region. Hundreds of Iraqi soldiers have been captured, and U.S. and allied airstrikes appear to have failed to push back ISIL from its strongholds in Anbar. 

In Syria, ISIL engaged in intense fighting on Monday with Kurdish forces in Kobani—a key town near the Turkish border that could grant Islamic militants new smuggling lines for fighters and supplies if they control it. U.S. airstrikes have also failed to relieve ISIL’s siege of Kobani. 

Additionally, the Wall Street Journal reported on Sunday that ISIL fighters have adopted new tactics to evade airstrikes and retain control of territory, including avoiding the use of cell phones and radios, removing their leaders and weapons from bases in Syria, and blending in with the civilian population.

For a group of jayvees pretending to be The Lakers, ISIS isn't doing too badly. And since Obama has promised not too put American boots on the ground-- probably one of the only Obama promises I actually believe-- all ISIS has to do is keep its head down for a while as they continue to murder stacks of people, and cut the heads of selected Westerners.

Obama has no plan, no stomach, and is afraid to deal with actual enemies of the US and its allies. Expect nothing but more ISIS killings, and Obama's attempts to blame others and downplay the violence. Oh, and expect the media to continue to roll over on Obama's command.

Obama's ISIS Speech-- A Waste of Air

Hey, don't worry about those ISIS fellows. The self-canonized St. Obama will save us all. It's just like how he was going to make us all rich.

Obama took a brief respite from his grueling golf schedule today to gift us with a speech on the guys who are butchering people across Syria and Iraq. Arab Spring anyone?

 Obama had nothing to say except things are getting better domestically (uh-huh, that's why we have the greatest number of long-term unemployed in American history, just basking in the economic glory), and everything else isn't my fault but it'll be fine. What leadership...

Tom Rogan at the NRO succinctly sums up the weaknesses in Obama's speech.

From his NRO article:

It [Obama's speech] had four key substantive failures. 

First, adopting U.S. strategy in Somalia and Yemen as a guide for action against ISIS doesn’t make sense. The situations in Yemen and Somalia are hardly inspiring. From Yemen, al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula constitutes a major threat to the West. Similarly, in Somalia, while al-Shabaab has suffered some notable losses, the group retains a significant regional capability (as illustrated by the Westgate Mall attack). Because of its military assets, internationally destabilizing influence, and expansionist ideology, ISIS must be confronted with a strategy that is more encompassing than that in Somalia and Yemen. 

Second, the president’s speech provides further evidence of his administration’s confusion over the connected power and potential of U.S. leadership. Referencing Arab support, Mr. Obama erred when he noted the limits of U.S. power to effect regional political stability. While this statement is true, to the Sunni Arab monarchies who regard Obama’s foreign policy with thinly veiled disdain, it will suggest another marker of hesitation. That’s a major issue — because unless the United States can persuade these states to coalesce around American strategy, they will continue to support Sunni extremists in Syria. After all, these leaders regard their primary threat as Iran, not ISIS. 

Third, the president failed to provide specifics on what contributions his coalition partners will provide to the counter-ISIS effort. As I noted on Monday, coalitions are complicated. By exaggerating tangible international support — the president’s hopeful mention of U.N. engagement was especially absurd — Mr. Obama has invited expectations he cannot meet. He’s weakened his credibility with the American people. 

But the most problematic element of Mr. Obama’s speech was, fourth, his statement that “American forces will not have a combat mission — we will not get dragged into another ground war in Iraq.” While there is little public or congressional support for a major ground operation against ISIS, the president, by explicitly ruling out any ground troops, has eliminated his critical Special Operations portfolio. This is cause for deep concern. Without limited Special Forces deployments on the ground — especially in eastern Syria’s Deir ez-Zor and Raqqah governorates, and north/central Iraq — it will be extremely difficult to restrict ISIS supply routes along the Euphrates corridor. Denying ISIS its maneuver-support structure will hasten ISIS’s defeat. The president’s only alternative is to order a massive deployment of CIA personnel instead. This is a damaging limitation of strategy at the altar of presumed public opinion. It plainly isn’t leadership.

This speech shouldn't surprise anyone. I mean, what on earth did we expect? Obama has no plan. He's proven repeatedly that he never does. I doubt that Obama is even fully aware of what is going on in the world. I think he avoids it because it hurts his frail ego.

Obama's pattern is clear. He simply makes a placating speech, then hopes that things don't get worse on his watch. If things do get worse-- as they have with ObamaCare, Syria, Egypt, Ukraine, etc.-- he goes into damage control mode and spins blame on the handiest target. which could be Bush, Cheney, the GOP, the Tea Party, ATMs, greed, etc.

Hey America, you voted for a guy who's whole accomplishments are based only in race and PR. Did you expect anything more but PR from him?

Does al Qaeda Have Access to Syria's Biological Weapons?

"Don't worry. ObamaCare will cure all biological weapons' ills. Would I lie? Look at this patriotic halo of mine!"

Maybe.

From The Free Beacon article by Adam Kredo:

Al Qaeda-aligned militants operating in Syria could already have access to “biological pathogens or weaponized agents,” according to terrorism and biological warfare experts studying the region. 

The possible acquisition by al Qaeda of these highly dangerous toxins has prompted bio-warfare experts to label the threat a “clear and present danger.” 

Extremist militants and other fighters tied to the terror group al Qaeda have continued to gain a foothold in key sections of Syria as the country’s civil war rages on. 

Lawlessness has taken hold in many areas that are home to Syria’s biological weapons research hubs and mounting evidence indicates that al Qaeda fighters have capitalized on this security gap by looting the facilities. 

“The Syrian civil war has left sections of the bio-pharmaceutical infrastructure destroyed and looting of labs has been observed, which could indicate that Assad is losing command and control over one of the most dangerous classes of weapons remaining in his weapons of mass destruction (WMD) arsenal,” bio warfare and terrorism experts Jill Bellamy van Aalst and Olivier Guitta conclude in a new report. 

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is believed to have ample biological weapons stores in addition to the chemical weapons currently being confiscated by Western nations. These caches likely include various neurotoxins and deadly viruses, according to U.S. intelligence estimates and other experts.  

[...]  

Sen. John Cornyn (R., Texas) warned last month that Syria’s unsecured bioweapons pose a great threat to the region. 

U.S. intelligence agencies have reported that Assad possesses various biological weapons and has an active research program underway. 

“Based on the duration of Syria’s longstanding biological warfare (BW) program, we judge that some elements of the program may have advanced beyond the research and development stage and may be capable of limited agent production,” Director of National Intelligence James Clapper wrote in an unclassified April report. 

“Syria is not known to have successfully weaponized biological agents in an effective delivery system, but it possesses conventional and chemical weapon systems that could be modified for biological agent delivery,” Clapper concluded. 

Biological weapons could more easily be obtained and used by terrorist forces, experts warned.
“The problem with bio-weapons, unlike chemical or nuclear, is the quality and weaponization for dispersal that counts, not the quantity, Guitta and van Aarst wrote.  

“You do not need a stockpile and you do not need sophisticated delivery methods, in fact, that is no longer optimal. Bio-weapons are silent, and determining that an attack has occurred can be challenging.”

Well, that just means that Obama and the media can ignore or downplay an attack, until it's politically convenient. How very appropriate in the Age of Obama.

Iran Plans Attack on American Interests and Embassies if US Attacks Syria

"They best not interfere with the Light-bringer. Woe shall befall all who do not tremble in his presence."

Is this  a surprise to anyone?

What would be a surprise is if the Obama Administration had taken steps to prevent this sort of thing before announcing their goal to attack Syria.

From The Wall Street Journal (via Drudge):

The U.S. has intercepted an order from Iran to militants in Iraq to attack the U.S. Embassy and other American interests in Baghdad in the event of a strike on Syria, officials said, amid an expanding array of reprisal threats across the region.  

Military officials have been trying to predict the range of possible responses from Syria, Iran and their allies. U.S. officials said they are on alert for Iran's fleet of small, fast boats in the Persian Gulf, where American warships are positioned. U.S. officials also fear Hezbollah could attack the U.S. Embassy in Beirut. 

While the U.S. has moved military resources in the region for a possible strike, it has other assets in the area that would be ready to respond to any reprisals by Syria, Iran or its allies.  

[...]  

The Iranian message, intercepted in recent days, came from Qasem Soleimani, the head of Revolutionary Guards' Qods Force, and went to Iranian-supported Shiite militia groups in Iraq, according to U.S. officials. 

In it, Mr. Soleimani said Shiite groups must be prepared to respond with force after a U.S. strike on Syria. Iranian officials didn't respond to requests for comment.   

Iraqi Shiites have been sympathetic to the Alawite-dominated government of Syria and oppose U.S. strikes against the regime of President Bashar al-Assad. 

U.S. officials said the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad was one likely target. The officials didn't describe the range of potential targets indicated by the intelligence. 

Attacks on the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad have fallen since American forces left Iraq. In the past, Iranian-trained Shiite groups have fired rockets and mortars at the embassy, at the urging of the Qods Force, a paramilitary arm of the IRGC. 

Militants also have used suicide bombers and IEDs to attack Americans leaving the embassy compound, one of the largest American diplomatic facilities in the world, located in Baghdad's fortified Green Zone.

You know, this sort of situation could get really out of control fast if a thin-skinned, arrogant and power obsessed fellow with a chip on his shoulder and with something to prove was president.

Uh oh.

MSNBC Churning Out Pro-Obama Memes

"Who said red line? Not me. The world did. It's all of their faults."

Apparently MSNBC is going for the coveted "Ministry of Truth Award" given out by the Obama Administration. They're throwing out pro-Obama and pro-Syrian attack memes across Facebook. Go get 'em independent press!

From Ken Shepherd at NewsBusters:

MSNBC hosts are skeptical if not downright opposed in principle to President Obama's push to bomb Syria, but the MSNBC.com Facebook page is doing its level best to present President Obama in a favorable light, complete with photo memes of the president adorned with quotes related to his Syria policy

[...]  

Three days later, the network's social media folks were at it again, taking a laughable line from the president about how it was not he who drew the now-infamous "red line" but the world:

"I didn't set a red line, the world set a red line." President Obama on Syria 9/4/2013

Ah, the wonderful world of Obama-approved propaganda-- or as NBC would have you believe, the news.

US Foes Encouraged by Middle East Turmoil and Sense Opportunity

While many in America romantically laud the Egyptian uprising, American foes have been encouraging such uprisings for many years. Israel is being squeezed into a more and more precarious position as radical Islamic groups successfully jockey for political control and Western legitimacy amidst the chaos.

From The Wall Street Journal article by Jay Soloman:

"The so-called resistance bloc of nations and Islamist movements, led by Iran and Syria, believes it is increasingly on the ascent as unrest seethes in the Middle East.

"United in its opposition to the U.S. and Israel, this coalition is seeing many of its chief regional adversaries weakened—particularly Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and Jordan's King Abdullah II.

"Tehran and Damascus have also been buoyed by last month's toppling of Beirut's pro-Western government at the hands of Hezbollah, the Lebanese political party and militia the two countries fund and arm.

"'[The unrest] proved that the global arrogance's era of domination and control of the region has come to an end,' Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi said on Tehran's state television this week, using Iran's catch-phrase for the U.S."

But what about the contention that this unrest is part of a popular revolt against oppressive regimes? Well, few Middle Eastern regimes are more repressive than Syria and Iran. Personally I'll buy the hype when Syria begins to feel the heat. Iran won't since it weathered the Green Revolution following the sham elections.

The article continues:

"Syria is emerging as a bellwether to gauge the shifting power balance in the region.

"Damascus technically remains at war with Israel and, along with Tehran, is the principal financier and arms supplier for Hezbollah and the Palestinian organization Hamas, which controls the Gaza strip in the Palestinian territories. Hamas's leadership, headed by political director Khaled Meshaal, is headquartered in Syria.

"Organizations opposing the rule of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad have pledged to launch their own protest movement this week and have cited Saturday as a 'day of rage.' Any sustainable movement against the Syrian leadership would buttress the argument that the protest wave is a broad-based effort driven by economics and concerns about lack of political freedoms, Western diplomats said.

"Mr. Assad on Sunday told The Wall Street Journal that his regime remains stable and that the true targets of the unrest are Washington's allies who have supported the war in Iraq and the Arab-Israeli peace process. He said Iran, Turkey and Syria will likely emerge with greater influence as the political transformation of the region continues.

"'As long as the people have a major say in the future [of the Middle East], then you are going to have the minor say in the United States,' Mr. Assad said.

[...]

"Iran has been particularly vocal in calling for Mr. Mubarak's overthrow in Egypt. Iranian leaders have drawn similarities between the events in Cairo and the 1979 Islamic revolution that deposed the U.S.-backed shah in Tehran. Iran has also voiced support for the Muslim Brotherhood, a Cairo-based group banned in Egypt that hopes to meld the Islamic religion with Egypt's legal system. The movement is expected to gain significant influence in any post-Mubarak government in Cairo.

"'With [the region] assuming a new shape and the developments under way, [we hope] we would be able to see a Middle East that is Islamic and powerful,' Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast told reporters in Tehran on Monday.

"Mr. Meshaal, the Hamas chief, has kept his silence in Damascus since the uprising against Arab governments broke out. Mr. Mubarak has closely cooperated with Israel in imposing an economic siege on the Gaza strip since Hamas took power in the Palestinian territory in 2007.
However, Hamas officials said in interviews this week that what's happening could be to the Islamist movement's advantage. They expect the changes in Egypt and Jordan, in particular, to give them more room to operate.

"'We like what's happening,' a senior Hamas official said.

"Two other countries that could emerge more powerful are Qatar and Turkey.

"The tiny emirate of Qatar is home to the Pentagon's Central Command in Doha and provided logistical support to the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. But it also funds the Arab television channel, al-Jazeera, which has been a major voice calling for political changes in Egypt, Tunisia and Yemen. Qatar has also increasingly provided financial and diplomatic support for Hamas and Hezbollah."

When the American media and Hamas are both pleased with what they see in the Middle East, it's time to worry a little.

Obama Sneaks in Envoy to Syria with Recess Appointment

Just to show that the Obama administration thinks murderous, saber-rattling regimes aren't so bad and can be reasoned with...

From The Jerusalem Post article by Hilary Leila Krieger:

"Republicans lashed out at the White House for making a recess appointment of Robert Ford as US ambassador to Syria Wednesday after efforts to have him confirmed by the Senate stalled.

"Ford will be the first US ambassador to Syria since 2005, when the US ambassador then in place was recalled by the Bush administration following the assassination of the anti-Syrian Lebanese leader Rafik Hariri, widely suspected to have been done with the help of Damascus.

[...]

"'Congress is not typically happy or pleased about recess appointments. It makes it very difficult for these people to be reconfirmed, so it's a one-year appointment,' explained Syria expert David Schenker of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

"He said the decision to return an ambassador to Damascus showed that the Obama administration hadn't decided to change its engagement policy with Syria despite its role in transferring serious weaponry to Hizbullah and its unwillingness to comply with the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency about its suspected nuclear site.

"He added that the Obama administration was also eager to have an emissary in place before the UN tribunal handed down indictments in Hariri's murder, which are expected to be issued in the coming weeks against members of Hizbullah and could implicate Syria as well.

"'They think this will help to calm or constrain Syrian behavior,' Schenker said.

"But he questioned how much the US had to gain from having an ambassador on the ground, given the intensive outreach from senior officials who have traveled to Damascus to communicate the American perspective.

"'I'm not optimistic it will have any type of positive impact,' Schenker said."

What's not to be optimistic about? Talking to our enemies gives them a whole new venue to spread misinformation and distraction. What could go wrong?