Posted on 03/28/2017 1:37:54 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Defeating the Islamic State was candidate Trump’s top national-security priority, one of the few policy issues on which he was consistent. While his claim to have a secret plan — and that keeping it secret was good strategy — was risible to national security experts, his policy goals were and are consistent. American effort should focus on fighting the Islamic State. Regime change to push Bashar al-Assad out of power was not only a lesser objective, but counterproductive to a stable end-state for Syria that prevents terrorism and too costly given Russia and Iran’s support for the regime. Stability is to be prioritized over humanitarian relief or democracy promotion. Russia is to be palliated, their interests supported.
He proclaimed that “we are going to convey my top generals and give them a simple instruction. They will have 30 days to submit to the Oval Office a plan for soundly and quickly defeating ISIS.” While strictly speaking that deadline has passed without apparent formal approval, the Departments of State and Defense have indeed been prioritizing defeating the Islamic State.
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson made his first big international event the gathering of the coalition fighting the Islamic State, reinforcing the president’s twin messages that it's the administration’s top national-security priority, and that “the United States will increase our pressure on ISIS and al Qaeda and will work to establish interim zones of stability, through ceasefires, to allow refugees to return home.”
Secretary of Defense James Mattis met early with Middle Eastern partners and has taken a number of decisions that look to strengthen forces in the fight: increasing the number of American servicemen and women in Iraq and Syria, reinterpreting the advise-and-assist mission to put U.S. forces closer to the front, parachuting U.S. forces in to sever routes around Mosul,
(Excerpt) Read more at yahoo.com ...
1. First, they are prioritizing speed. dramatically picking up the pace of operations.
2. Second, they are committing the United States to a long-term involvement.Signaling our commitment to outcomes rather than imposing arbitrary timelines is a significant change in approach, one providing desperately needed assurance to those who share our objectives.
3. Third, they are clear about the priority being assisting the countries we want to win the wars now underway. Tillerson said at the coalition meeting, “When everything is a priority, nothing is a priority. We must continue to keep our focus on the most urgent matter at hand.”
4. Fourth, they are laying the foundation for an anti-Iran coalition once the Islamic State problem has been solved.
Mad Dog’s first step was to have ammo issued to the troops serving in the Middle East...No more “barak-emptied” mags...
Someone needs to 'splain why removing Sadam was bad strategy but removing Assad is good. Seems that for certain people the only way to gain their sympathy is to support terror. No one is saying he's George Washington but in a culture of pretty bad leaders, Assad is not the worst of the bunch.
Can’t believe this came out of Yahoo.
It didn't. It's like this. Yahoo has a news index. The article is from Foreign Policy Mag. The author is a blogger at FP but her real job is as a Fellow at the Hoover Institution which is a rightwing think tank at Stanford
She had a low level job under George Bush but really doesn't know much about the subject
“one of the few policy issues on which he was consistent”
That is a laugh. I think President Trump is following through on all his campaign promises. The problems will be with the Republicans in the Congress.
You’re kidding, right, in that Hisself’s troops had unloaded weapons(?)
Schake was a signatory to the infamous letter from (alleged) GOP security experts that Trump was beyond the pale and that they could not support a party ticket he headed.
She can go jump in the lake.
Well...Absurdly restrictive rules of engagement are equivalent to having "unloaded" weapons...imho.
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.