Washington Post criticizes Obama’s air campaign

The editorial board of the Washington Post, You know, those guys who spent six years opposing US troops on the ground in Iraq and cheered the withdrawal of ground forces from Iraq in 2011, is criticizing the Obama plan for depending on airstrikes alone in that country now;

Why can’t the U.S.-led coalition prevent a ragtag insurgent army from overrunning large towns? The answers speak to the limitations imposed on the military campaign by President Obama as well as the continuing political complications of fighting the Islamic State. Military analysts point out that U.S. strikes on Islamic State forces around Kobane have come late and in small handfuls — not enough, as of Tuesday, to turn back thousands of fighters armed with tanks and artillery. In contrast with the successful 2002 air campaign against the Taliban in Afghanistan, U.S. pilots cannot rely on Special Forces spotters to identify targets. Mr. Obama has ruled out such ground personnel despite requests from military commanders.

They’re pretty brave with the lives of someone else’s sons’ and daughters’ lives, aren’t they? A year ago last July, the Washington Post’s editorial board recommended just this remedy for the problems that Iraq was facing – still opposing boots on the ground, but now, like our president, when the situation is clearly out of control, they have a solution and it involves more ground forces as if troops are the panacea for all of the world’s ills.

Category: Terror War