“I Had Groups of ISIS Fighters in My Sights, but Couldn’t Get Clearance to Engage.”

Frontpage Mag ^ | 05/27/2015 | Daniel Greenfield

[SeekAndFind]

^[1]

This isn’t really news. It’s just a reminder that the air strikes on ISIS are being run in the same disastrous fashion as those in Afghanistan. And it didn’t begin with Obama. Lest we forget, on the day before 9/11, Bill Clinton was boasting that he had let Osama bin Laden go to avoid collateral damage.

Obama Inc. talks about how the Iraqis don’t want to fight. It neglects to mention that it isn’t letting the military fight ^[2].

U.S. military pilots carrying out the air war against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria are voicing growing discontent over what they say are heavy-handed rules of engagement hindering them from striking targets.

They blame a bureaucracy that does not allow for quick decision-making. One Navy F-18 pilot who has flown missions against ISIS voiced his frustration to Fox News, saying: “There were times I had groups of ISIS fighters in my sights, but couldn’t get clearance to engage.”

He added, “They probably killed innocent people and spread evil because of my inability to kill them. It was frustrating.”

Sources close to the air war against ISIS told Fox News that strike missions take, on average, just under an hour, from a pilot requesting permission to strike an ISIS target to a weapon leaving the wing.

ISIS is well aware of the framework and functions within it. Just like the Taliban quickly learned that if they were in residential areas or around mosques, that if they didn’t show weapons, they were free and clear.

“You’re talking about hours in some cases, which by that time the particular tactical target left the area and or the aircraft has run out of fuel. These are excessive procedures that are handing our adversary an advantage,” said retired Lt. Gen. David Deptula, a former director of the Combined Air Operations Center in Afghanistan in 2001.

Deptula also contrasted the current air campaign against ISIS with past air campaigns.

The U.S.-led airstrikes over Iraq during the first Gulf War averaged 1,125 strike sorties per day, according to Deptula. He said the Kosovo campaign averaged 135 strikes per day. In 2003, the famous “shock and awe” campaign over Iraq saw 800 strikes per day.

According to the U.S.-led coalition to defeat ISIS, U.S. military aircraft carry out 80 percent of the strikes against ISIS and average 14 per day.

And for Obama that’s still too many.

[colorado tanker]

It’s a joke. Just another Obama lie so he can claim he’s doing something knowing the press will cover his lies.

[SandRat]

COMBAT PILOTS SHOULD BE TOLD “WEAPONS FREE!” AT TIME OF TAKE OFF.

[omega4412]

This isn’t really news. It’s just a reminder that the air strikes on ISIS are being run in the same disastrous fashion as those in Vietnam.

[struggle]

He’s trying to hurt ISIS, but not enough to stop the eventual overthrow of Assad.

Half-a$$ed.

[Jim Noble]

The United States is not at war with ISIS. The use of military force against them has not been authorized by Congress. It is unlikely, were force to be authorized, that the present administration could do so effectively.

And, most importantly, the American people, acting through their representatives, would never authorize a return in force to the area formerly called "Iraq".

Too bad about the inhabitants of North Arabia. Sucks to be them.

[Jim Noble]

COMBAT PILOTS SHOULD BE TOLD “WEAPONS FREE!” AT TIME OF TAKE OFF

American naval aviators and airmen have no authority to engage ISIS forces.

[Wilum]

It’s just a reminder that the air strikes on ISIS are being run in the same disastrous fashion as those in Vietnam.

Yup! Rolling Thunder Part II

[G Larry]

The ROE have been AFU since Nam.

They are much worse now.

[exnavy]

There is no authority to commit war.

[vette6387]

Without weapons, the Air Force is just an expensive flying club. Ditto for the Navy/Marines.

[RushIsMyTeddyBear]

Bkmrk.

[cymbeline]

I wonder if some of these soldiers ask for permission too often.

[expat2]

That’s what you get by putting a Muslim in the WH.

[rjsimmon]

American naval aviators and airmen have no authority to engage ISIS forces.

During my combat tour in Bosnia, we had similar limitations. Every day we say pillars of smoke rising over villages across that war-torn nation and the attack aircraft were denied authorization to engage.

[JimRed]

Clearance to engage? Any one who’s ever served in the military knows it’s much easier to get forgiveness than permission!

[pgkdan]

If obama’s aim was to help establish the caliphate and offset their power by allowing a nuclear iran, while he oversaw the destruction of the USA’s military and economic dominance in the rest of the world...exactly what would he do differently than what he’s doing now?

[NorthMountain]

This isn’t really news. It’s just a reminder that the air strikes on ISIS are being run in the same disastrous fashion as those in Vietnam.

This may be worse than Viet Nam. In VN, IIRC, they didn't have to ask permission in "real time".

[SunkenCiv]

Lest we forget, on the day before 9/11, Bill Clinton was boasting that he had let Osama bin Laden go to avoid collateral damage.