Category Archives: Kurds

by Barry Kelly | October 9, 2014 · 7:30 am

INSIGHTS 164: IF WORDS WERE BULLETS AND PROMISES BOMBS

Our president fills the airwaves with words and promises. Most of us have learned to just tune them out. He has a reputation as a good speaker but only if someone else writes the words and his technical staff puts them on a teleprompter. It would be more accurate to say he is very good at reading speeches. Words are simply a means to achieve some murky end.

The president’s words in a war environment are very different. We do not dare tune them out. People’s lives and freedoms are at stake.

This president is the least equipped to be a commander-in-chief than any president in my lifetime, which goes back to FDR’s first term. President Obama carries with him some very strange baggage. I think he believes American troops in foreign lands are and were there as occupiers. He has even referred to our troops in Iraq during the actual war as an army of occupiers. His anti-colonial distrust of American power is deeply ingrained, but not well hidden. No troops were left in Iraq because he wanted his legacy to be the president who lived up to his pre-election rhetoric to end wars, not start them. Any American forces left behind in Iraq would be interfering with the sovereignty of Iraq and be occupiers, not protectors of the peace.

As a result, we have ISIS. I gave the president credit for putting together a coalition of Islamic countries and for authorizing the air war. The no-boots-on-the-ground chant bothered me but I thought he would take advice from the Pentagon and intelligence agencies to guide the air war and when the time was right to put some troops on the ground to direct the air war and stiffen the Peshmerga and Sunni tribes to resist ISIS advances. The airstrikes did work to save Kirkuk and the huge nearby dam complex. Now ISIS commanders have adapted and the air war failed to reach the level of hundreds of strikes per day against fixed targets and targets of opportunity. Even now, outside the Kurdish city of Kobani, which ISIS is poised to capture and massacre thousands of non-believers in ISIS’s brand of Islam, the airstrikes are far to few and ineffective.

To reach Kobani with the troops and fire power necessary to push the Peshmerga out of part of their homeland, ISIS had to establish and maintain long lines of logistical support. These kinds of targets are vulnerable to air interdiction. ISIS logistical convoys of tanks and trucks have to move though miles of desolate, sparsely populated areas. There is no cover and very little need to worry about collateral damage. Yet the might of the American air power is not being used.

Civilian command over the military is a very important Constitutional precept. But that doesn’t mean political hacks in the White House should manage the war. Militarily, they are worse than incompetent, because in arrogance they believe they are right. How many books by former Cabinet officers in the Obama administration do we have to read or hear on TV before everyone realizes there is a huge difference between civilian control and civilian-hands-on-management by politicians whose primary purpose is to make the president look good? I thought we had learned our lesson in the Vietnam War when the White House acted as a command center and target selection facility outside the Pentagon. Then, as now, no high-ranking generals or admirals resigned rather than kowtow to politicians with no or very limited military credentials. It would be more honorable if, rather than write books afterward, they openly resisted bad political/military orders and resigned. Their oath is to defend America, not their careers or the political legacy of any president.

Written by the author of “Insights: Transforming America — Is This What We Fought For?” available now as an ebook, in paperback or hardcover on Amazon.com or BN.com. Follow the author on Twitter @factsfictions80. If you think this message is important, please share it.

1 Comment

Filed under Barry Kelly, Intelligence & Politics, ISIS, Kurds, Sunni, Terrorism

Tagged as America, BarackObama, iraq, ISIS, Islam, Middle East, White House

by Barry Kelly | October 1, 2014 · 7:30 am

INSIGHTS 160: FACTS ON THE GROUND

While the president and his administration are pointing fingers of blame at everyone and everything but themselves, let’s look at some ground truths.

The Obama administration could have had a Status of Forces of Agreement in Iraq to protect our troops from being charged, arrested, and tried in Iraqi courts. All that is required is for us to leave a mobile Army Division augmented by its supporting logistical units, air support, selected combat teams, and Special Forces in a U.S.-controlled base strategically located in Iraq. Prime Minister al-Maliki was in no position to follow his Iranian guidance and refuse. We could have replaced him. Sometimes the development of a new democracy needs a little forceful guidance.

When Obama pulled out all our troops, the training of the Iraqi Army with critical American combat support had reached a point where it could have defended Iraqi territory. Without American boots and eyes on the ground to detect and stop al-Maliki from critically weakening the Iraqi Army by replacing most Sunni and Kurdish officers with Shiite replacements, the Iraqi Army was no longer the force America trained. It had no chance against the ISIS invasion. al-Maliki’s leadership destroyed any faint hopes the Sunnis and Kurds had in sharing Iraq’s resources and having a real say in the governing of the country.

The powerful Sunni tribes that fought with U.S. forces to destroy al-Qaeda in Iraq are not going to fight to defend a corrupt Shiite government in Baghdad. Many of these Sunnis joined ISIS as the better choice for them. Some of the Sunnis trained by American forces may well be fighting with ISIS now. They only thing we can offer them to change sides is the promise of their own Sunni nation with no ties to a Shiite government located somewhere south of Baghdad.

The Kurds and their Peshmerga forces are good fighters. They will fight to the death to defend their people and their land. They will not defend the Shiite regime in Baghdad, no matter the name of the prime minister. For many decades, the Kurds have wanted control of their historical homeland. They have fought the Turks, Iranians, and Iraqis as far back as their oral history. American arms and supplies sent to the Kurds through Baghdad will never reach Kurdistan. Out of this chaos the Kurds are betting they have a good chance of winning their freedom. But they will need our help. Without assurances of a free Kurdistan, they will not fight ISIS forces very far from their own borders.

Iran is the biggest danger in the region. Their intent is to development nuclear weapons and missile delivery systems. We don’t know when it will happen, only that it will. Probably during President Obama’s time in office. The mindset of the current Iranian Islamic autocracy is that when they have nuclear weapons, they will use them.

Here again, the president holds views that have no basis in reality. He even has a secretary of state who shares his view of peace through negotiations even when the other side only demands instead of negotiating. It is a one-sided negotiation. Iran doesn’t want ISIS on its doorstep but will not change its focus on the development of nuclear weapons. Iran does not want to be involved in a punishing ground war with ISIS. The Iraqi Shiites will be protected by Iran and become an Iranian puppet pseudo state.

The Obama administration could have prevented the ISIS crisis if it had been more interested in the reality of foreign affairs rather than using inaction to create a make-believe, no-fault-of-Obama’a world. Inaction led to pulling all our troops out of Iraq and turning victory into defeat. Inaction led to the civil war in Syria from spreading into Iraq. Either the Obama Administration did not know or ignored indications al-Maliki was destroying the fabric of the Iraqi nation by cutting the Sunnis and the Kurds out of their share of oil revenue and a voice in the running of the national government, creating a fertile environment for ISIS forces.

The rate of training 5,000 fighters a year in Saudi Arabia to serve as ground troops is not going to work. It creates the illusion of action but is not going to be effective. NATO countries and Sunni coalition members need to field a force of at least 20,000 combat troops, augmented by as many regional fighters as we can recruit, and declare all of Syria and Iraq as a no-fly zone for military aircraft. With the right approach the Sunni tribes we can cut them out of the ISIS recruitment pool and set up a Sunni government to rival ISIS. To do that, President Obama has to recognize the Baghdad government is over and to stop negotiating unimportant legalistic details with a government that will soon be fleeing south. He also needs to get over his anti-colonial hangups about the alleged misuse of America military power in foreign lands. It is not unusual to hear liberal Americans refer to our efforts in Iraq in the Bush years as the “occupation of Iraq.” This is the epitome of “hate America” thinking. We all deserve a better legacy than that espoused by progressives.

EIGHT DECADES OF INSIGHTS 150

SHAPE THE BATTLEFIELD

President Obama read the polls and decided he should address the nation on the ISIS threat. But he didn’t say a word Wednesday night about how his past policies have made it necessary for America to go to war again in Iraq.

He claimed to have a small coalition of nine NATO nations and Australia who have not committed ground troops. That’s a bit smaller than the last time we went into Iraq, when we were supported by 29 nations who committed ground troops. President Obama did as well as he could from the foundations of his foreign policy over the last nearly six years. Let’s not poke anymore holes into his speech about ISIS.

As commander-in-chief, he needs to be clear on a few critical points. The first is call the threat what it is. It is radical Islam. Within those circles which include most of the Islamic world, it is a good thing to kill infidels/nonbelievers. Where are the moderate Muslims? The Saudis have funded radical madrases/schools all over the near, middle and far east for at least two decades. Money from Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, Kuwait, and Pakistan have poured resources into the Taliban and other radical Islamic organizations for years. Nearly all the World Trade Center bombers were Saudis. In Egypt the more moderate military is nearly fully occupied dealing with the Muslim Brotherhood that Obama backed against Mubarak. Libya doesn’t seem too moderate, nor does our old ally, Turkey. Pakistan is not a moderate Islamic nation. Good luck, Mr. President, in finding moderate Islamic states to join your coalition with real help and commitment. They may not continue to support ISIS but I doubt they will stand up with a Christian nation against ISIS. Their only interest is keeping ISIS away from their territory.

The second point is that competent boots on the ground are necessary to win any military campaign. Obama’s examples of his strategic success in fighting terrorism in Yemen and Somalia are not even relevant. The relevant bit of recent history is the Bush Administration defeating the Taliban in Afghanistan with approximately 500 American boots on the ground, all military or civilian special forces warriors and, of course, thousands of tribal fighters from the Northern Alliance. Enough fighters to push the Taliban into massing to defend against attack so the U.S. Air Force, flying no holds barred missions, including B-52s, destroyed the defense positions of the Taliban down the length of Afghanistan. The air strikes were guided to the kill zones by American civilian and uniformed Special Forces. That is a proven tactic. The problem is that skilled fighters like those of the Northern Alliance have yet to be identified.

With a clear broad view of the strategic battlefield, victory is possible without large U.S. combat units, but small units on the ground will be needed. First the Kurds will fight and can fight as soon as the Obama Administration recognizes the Kurds will fight for their own homeland. We need to accept and welcome Kurdistan into the alliance. As of last week they reported that had not received any arms shipments from the U.S. Our in the box thinkers had to send all aid to the Kurds through Baghdad which is the same as not sending any. Shiites don’t send weapons to Kurds.

The next tactic to hurt the heads of our people struggling to put Iraq back together again is to rekindle our Special Forces relationship with the Sunni tribes. They will not go back into a Shiite-dominated government so recognize that, and tell the humpty-dumpty bureaucrats trying to patch together a phony country to cease and desist. The Sunni tribes, if promised their own land and given weapons, will fight and take care of the ISIS forces in Iraq. The next step is easy. Let the Shiites retreat south of Baghdad until they decide they will stop and fight for their own land, Shiiteville. All we have to do then is separate the not so bad guys from the really bad guys in Syria and work with them to get rid of the Assad tyranny. All this can be done in less than a year with very few American WIA or KIA. What was Iraq is now nearly the same as it was before arrogant western diplomats drew unreal lines on a map and created the nightmare of Iraq. None of this can be done unless the president gets out of the way and lets the Pentagon and CIA run the war on terror and radical Islam.

Written by the author of “INSIGHTS: Transforming America — Is This What We Fought For?” available in hardcover, paperback, and ebook formats from Amazon and Barnes and Noble. You are encouraged to share this message and follow the author on Twitter @factsfictions80.

2 Comments

Filed under Afghanistan, Barry Kelly, Conservative views, Eight Decades of Insights, foreign policy, Intelligence & Politics, Kurds, Obama, Shiite, Sunni, Terrorism

Tagged as America, iraq, ISIS, Islam, Middle East, military, Obama, u.s.

by Barry Kelly | September 6, 2014 · 7:32 am

EIGHT DECADES OF INSIGHTS 151

POLICY TO DEFEAT ISIS

Outlining a policy to defeat ISIS is not hard. Implementing the policy is much harder, especially when the government is run by a bunch of radical left wing lawyers and ideologues.

To begin, the president needs to recognize the problem. It is not workplace violence as the Obama administration stills labels the murder of soldiers at Fort Hood by a radical Islamist shouting Muslim slogans. With that mindset, this administration will never defeat ISIS with a law and order approach or a “management approach.” Wars are not won by lawyers spouting law and order sound bites: “We’ll bring them to justice.”

What kind of insanity is that? We need to destroy them with our military power. Our warriors need to be in charge of the battle. Keep the lawyers out.

Speaking of lawyers, who do you think has made it mandatory to ship all our weapons to the Kurds through the Shiite government in Baghdad? It has to be the Obama lawyer group. The government in Baghdad is useless. They are and have been a Shiite-dominated government. They are not going to pass weapons on to the Kurds. They don’t want the Kurds to have effective weapons. They have no intentions of helping the Kurds establish a Kurdish nation. And the Kurds will not again put themselves under a Shiite government in Baghdad or anywhere else. The Obama administration has lied again to Congress and the people. The Kurds are not, repeat not, receiving weapons to defend themselves and perform as “boots on the ground” in their area.

Our legalistic Obama administration just can’t grasp the fact that Iraq is no longer a nation. The American troops in Baghdad are primarily there to defend the embassy. For we are still pretending Iraq is a nation that we should continue to recognize and support. Baghdad will fall and the American embassy will be another R&R facility for the victors. Our second policy principle must be recognition that the borders in Iraq, drawn by the Western powers after WWI, are gone. Kurdistan has all the ingredients of nationhood and should be recognized and supported. The enemy does not recognize the border between Syria and Iraq. It is meaningless unless you are an Obama lawyer or diplomat. Our military and political efforts to defeat ISIS must ignore the old border.

The third principle is that we once had a working relationship with the Sunni tribal leaders. That relationship needs to be re-established. We will need to convince the Sunnis that we will keep our word and support them in their own autonomous region, independent of the Shiite government. They will fight for their own land, if supported with U.S. weapons and Special Forces operatives. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Libya, and the Gulf States will support a Sunni homeland in what was part of Iraq. The lawyers will never support this shift. Therefore, it is time for President Obama to surrounded himself with operatives who have a grasp of the real world, instead of the ideologues now occupying the White House.

The fourth policy principle is the president must turn over the management of the war to the Defense Department. If he keeps the White House legal team, the UN, and the State Department out of the war business, we can defeat ISIS. John Kerry always makes everything he touches worse and the Obama lawyers and ideologues have absolutely no real-world experience. The UN has no love for America and is useless in serious peace keeping operations.

I do not expect the Obama administration to leave their progressive ideology to adopt these sensible principles. But they should!

2 Comments

Filed under Barry Kelly, Conservative views, Eight Decades of Insights, foreign policy, Intelligence & Politics, Kurds, Obama, Shiite, Sunni

Tagged as current-events, iraq, ISIS, Islam, Middle East, military, Progressives, White House

by Barry Kelly | August 20, 2014 · 7:30 am

EIGHT DECADES OF INSIGHTS 141

KURDS AND ISIS

However he got there doesn’t matter. It is rare that President Obama gets policy and action together to do the right thing. So let’s give him credit for helping the Kurds rescue thousands of minority religious followers and begin pushing ISIS back into traditional Sunni tribal areas. Without U.S. airstrikes and weapons delivered to the Kurds, the Mosel Dam and Christians and other minorities would still be in the hands of ISIS. There is absolutely no question that ISIS is capable of genocide against any people who do not believe in sharia law.

Unfortunately, this is not a short-term problem with a quick answer. The right thing is to support the Kurds. Their army, the Peshmerga, can and will fight to protect their homeland and people. All they need is an American commitment to supply needed weapons and some economic support. They can be a pillar of stability in the region and a military balance to the ISIS. The Kurds will not, unless forced, ever put their fate in the hands of a Baghdad Shiite or Sunni government. They have suffered under successive Baghdad regimes. The Kurds also have no love for Iran or Turkey.

Over the last five-plus years, the world has seen that our word cannot be taken at face value. Therefore, the problem for the Kurds is deciding whether they can trust our commitments. They are in a very dangerous position with few options. America will get another chance to show the world if our word means anything. The president has broad powers in foreign policy and armed conflict issues. But in this case it would help if he could involve Congress in long-term support for the Kurds. This is an issue he should not use to attack his opposition. There has to be some kind of a line between progressive political goals and something as serious as building a area of stability in the wreckage of Iraq that is friendly with America.

We can not expect the Kurds to trust us if we show intent of putting them back under a Baghdad regime. The president and Congress need to accept that the idea of a Shiite government ever being trusted by the Sunnis or the Kurds is gone. In fact, it was never a viable option. The borders of the Middle East have been changed de facto. A smart foreign policy would accept the change and move on. Please, Mr. President, keep Secretary of State, John Kerry out of Kurdish policy issues. You and we cannot afford any more bumbling by your Department of State.

Read my non-fiction book, “INSIGHTS: Transforming America –Is this what we fought for? “