Home / Politics / Obama’s no ‘strategy yet’ criticism on ISIS in Syria sparks a domestic uproar

Obama’s no ‘strategy yet’ criticism on ISIS in Syria sparks a domestic uproar

Washington (CNN) — When is a plan not a strategy? When it’s a domestic football.

President Barack Obama has lighted uninformed regressive critique by observant “we don’t have a plan yet” for airstrikes opposite ISIS targets in Syria.

Republicans immediately jumped on a President’s criticism during a news discussion Thursday by observant it valid their longstanding censure that his unfamiliar process unsuccessful to severely respond to a militant hazard from Sunni jihadists in a Syrian polite war.

“I’m not certain a astringency of a problem has unequivocally sunk in to a administration usually yet,” pronounced GOP Rep. Mike Rogers of Michigan, who chairs a House comprehension committee.


U.S. enhances aviation confidence overseas


W.H. defends Obama’s ‘no strategy’ line


Pentagon grilled about ISIS plan

Referring to a ISIS lightning brush opposite northern Iraq this summer, Rogers pronounced “we knew it was a problem before June” and remarkable that “even a President pronounced he was articulate about this to Iraqi officials over a year ago.”

“When a militant classification acts like an army, they benefaction infantry targets a proceed any other army would do,” he said, arguing a United States should have been going after such ISIS targets progressing “to reduce and interrupt a movement of this really dangerous organization.”

Waffling allegation

Retired Army Gen. George Joulwan, a former NATO autarchic associated commander, told CNN on Friday that while he believed Obama’s proceed amounted to a bit of “waffling,” rising airstrikes in Syria requires lots of preparation.

ISIS is not a state though an classification fighting a Syrian supervision of President Bashar al-Assad, whom a United States also wants out of power, Joulwan noted. That creates complications, as does what he called Syria’s “very worldly atmosphere invulnerability system.”

“I consider we need to have clarity here of what that goal is, what it is before we start promulgation an airstrikes or troops,” he said. “What is a clarity here of what a finish state is that we wish to achieve? We didn’t do that in Iraq or Afghanistan or in Vietnam. We’ve got to do it if we’re going to get concerned again.”

The White House done a same point, with orator Josh Earnest attributing any dispute over Obama’s phrasing to spin rather than substance.

Former CIA chief: Matter of time before ISIS tries to dispute West

Obama strategy

He told CNN that Obama “was asked a specific doubt about what proceed he was going to pursue when it came to probable infantry movement in Syria” opposite ISIS.

“That was a specific doubt he was asked, and a President was explicit, that he is still watchful for skeleton that are being grown by a Pentagon for infantry options that he has for going into Syria,” Earnest said, adding that “the President has been really transparent for months about what a extensive plan is for confronting” a ISIS hazard in Iraq.


ISIS vs. al Qaeda: How they’re different

He listed stairs that have turn a mantra of sorts in responding to determined doubt by reporters in new weeks about a plan for opposed ISIS in Iraq and Syria:


Does Pres. Obama have a plan for ISIS?


White House clarifies Obama remark

• A one Iraqi supervision “that can combine that nation to accommodate a hazard that’s confronting their nation right now”;

• Strengthening a U.S. attribute with Iraqi and Kurdish confidence army “to make certain that they have a apparatus and training that they need to take a quarrel to” ISIS on a ground;

• Getting informal governments to join in holding on ISIS;

• Forging an general bloc to join in holding on ISIS, something Obama unsuccessful to do when he contemplated though eventually motionless opposite aggressive Syria final year over a chemical weapons; and,

• The use of infantry force, such as a airstrikes launched in Iraq opposite ISIS to strengthen American crew and minority groups underneath threat.

“The President is transparent that a plan is one that’s not going to solve a problem overnight, though he’s also transparent about a fact that a plan can’t usually be a American military,” Earnest said. “If we’ve schooled anything over a final 10 or 12 years … it’s that a plan that usually includes infantry force will not be an fast resolution to this problem.”

Who is a ISIS?

Partners needed

Democratic Rep. Adam Smith of Washington concurred, revelation CNN that Obama’s “no strategy” criticism privately referred to airstrikes in Syria that awaited final planning.

“I consider a genuine emanate there is anticipating a partner to work with,” he said, adding that “we need to find partners that we can work with in Syria to assistance us enclose ISIS.”

At a same time, “we positively don’t wish to come in a proceed that is understanding of a heartless and deceptive Assad regime in Syria,” Smith said. “So it is a formidable problem to figure out a best strategy. we agree, they have protected breakwater there in tools of Syria and that will have to be partial of a plan for containing” ISIS.

5 pivotal questions in a quarrel opposite ISIS

Past arguments

Republicans led by hawkish conservatives such as Sen. John McCain of Arizona have called for years for larger U.S. impasse in a Syrian conflict.

They complained when Obama deserted defending a Syrian antithesis opposite al-Assad’s supervision as distant behind as 3 years ago. Even a President’s former secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, advocated some-more assistance in 2011 and 2012 for insurgent factions deliberate moderate.

However, opponents of such a pierce warned a Syrian antithesis was too splintered and ideologically different to arm it.

The arise of ISIS from former al Qaeda affiliates gives provender to a stances of both sides.

Obama critics contend subsidy assuage Syrian factions could have prevented a extremists from gaining traction and helped a antithesis disintegrate al-Assad, as desired. Supporters contend U.S. weapons would now be in a hands of ISIS if they had been sent to Syria when a quarrel began.

Now a United States is promulgation weapons and other assist to some Syrian antithesis groups.

Opinion: How U.S. can assistance Syria expostulate out ISIS

Leading from behind

The Syria emanate touches on broader aspects of Obama’s unfamiliar process and ideological differences with conservatives.

Obama campaigned on finale a wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and he fake a unfamiliar process formed on easing a tellurian faith on a United States to always lead a involvement charge.

His change came as America emerged from retrogression and confronted bill purgation issues that brought spending cuts opposite a board, including to a military.

Obama and Democrats wish reduced spending widespread equally as partial of recalibrating supervision priorities.

Republicans, generally conservatives, find to say and swing U.S. infantry competence and change while slicing spending elsewhere to cringe a altogether distance of government.

The discuss underpins most of a domestic plan and maneuvering in Washington, generally with congressional elections appearing in November.

What can a U.S. do opposite ISIS in Syria — and could it work?


Article source: http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/29/politics/obama-isis-strategy/

Scroll To Top