The Pentagon can not yet decide on the defeat of ISIS

15
As the RIA NewsThe Pentagon continues to carry out instructions from US President Donald Trump and is seeking opportunities to force the fight against ISIL (a terrorist organization banned in the Russian Federation). At this stage of decision making, sending additional troops to Syria is not envisaged.

The Pentagon can not yet decide on the defeat of ISIS


We are in the process of 30-day study of the strategy for the destruction of the IG, as instructed by the president, as part of this we are considering a number of measures to accelerate the campaign, but so far no decision has been made.

- explained the representative of the Ministry of Defense.



At the end of January, D. Trump instructed Secretary of Defense James Mattis to develop a plan to combat ISIS during 30 days, including taking into account the search for new allies for a coalition led by the United States: the plan should include “identifying new coalition partners in the fight against IS and policies to support coalition partners in fighting the IS and its supporters. "
Earlier there was information that the Pentagon, as a way out of the current situation, may offer to send regular US military units to Syria to fight ISIS militants.
15 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +1
    16 February 2017 06: 33
    This is like a second front. Until we break the ridge of the enemy, the “ally” will not move!
    1. +2
      16 February 2017 06: 35
      Exactly ... to the section would not be late, do not think for a long time!
      At this stage in the development of the decision, the dispatch of additional troops to Syria is not provided.
      1. +2
        16 February 2017 09: 20
        Quote: himRa
        Exactly ... to the section would not be late, do not think for a long time!

        When Assad’s troops will be at Raqqa’s, then the mattresses will open a “second front” ... a classic of the genre ... and then announce that they are equal winners of ISIS.
    2. 0
      16 February 2017 06: 38
      Yes, in fact, it would be better if the Allies didn’t do anything at all ... And they didn’t approach the Syrian border for 500 km ...
  2. 0
    16 February 2017 06: 37
    Who exactly is not needed there is an army of mattresses, the conflict will only flare up even more.
  3. +1
    16 February 2017 06: 38
    They will decide to defeat daish when New York looks like a city in the photo fool
  4. 0
    16 February 2017 06: 51
    In Afghanistan, as a result of the "war" with the Taliban, heroin production has risen sharply! In Syria, the "production" of suicide bombers has been put on stream. Now they are still armed and replenish their ranks, and continue to “fight” him, fueling weapons and money.
  5. 0
    16 February 2017 07: 04
    Eliminate the United States from any participation in Middle East conflicts and everything will be decided in a maximum of 5 years. Wangyu even that will calm down in the same way with what it began, a new colonel in Libya and a new strong party in Iraq. And if in Iraq over time it is possible to build a democratic state, then with Libya there are pipes, there is an alloy of different tribes with a strictly patriarchal structure. They can only be kept with a strong hand from internecine strife.
    1. 0
      16 February 2017 10: 18
      Quote: Nix1986
      And if in Iraq over time it is possible to build a democratic state .................,

      You’re no longer Vanguete ........
      Shiites and Sunnis will blow up each other in mosques and bazaars. Religious showdown is for a long time.
      Quote: Nix1986
      They can only be kept with a strong hand from internecine strife.

      And this is a dictatorship, not democracy)))
      The conclusion is either the division of the territory on the principle of the predominance of most Shiites and Sunnis (North. South. Sudan) i.e. North and Southern Iraq + a piece of Iraqi Kurdistan, or, oddly enough, the same federalization within the territorial borders of Iraq. Yes, and with Libya will be settled, in the same way ...
  6. +1
    16 February 2017 07: 04
    Quote: Mar. Tira
    This is like a second front. Until we break the ridge of the enemy, the “ally” will not move!

    Quote: Alex_Rarog
    Yes, in fact, it would be better if the Allies didn’t do anything at all ... And they didn’t approach the Syrian border for 500 km ...

    Yes, nothing is being solved in Syria! We are specifically helping our ally Assad. They will defeat ISIS in Syria and go to another country. At the moment, the field of ISIS is like occupied Europe in 1941. It is the whole of North Africa and almost the entire Middle East. we must fight, as with Nazism, from all sides, from Morocco and from India! And put in place sane regimes in the liberated countries (or strengthen existing ones). And without a broad coalition, there is nothing to do there.
    And one more place to put the main sponsors of ISIS-Qatar and Qatar (and others). They are sitting on gas and oil, they have countless money! Then we can talk about the victory over ISIS. Yes hi
  7. 0
    16 February 2017 07: 13
    At the end of January, D. Trump instructed Secretary of Defense James Mattis to develop a plan to combat ISIS during 30 days, including taking into account the search for new allies for a coalition led by the United States: the plan should include “identifying new coalition partners in the fight against IS and policies to support coalition partners in fighting the IS and its supporters. "


    And this stray dog ​​immediately rushed to perform! First of all, he called on Russia to "talk from a position of strength" ... No, the Americans are incorrigible ...
  8. 0
    16 February 2017 08: 18
    Issuing threatening and non-binding rods in the Senate and actually acting on the ground are slightly different things. They have a conflict of interest there. Their ardent and loyal allies in the form of Qatar and Saudi Arabia actively sponsor the caliphate with all kinds of assistance. Mosul was never taken. In general, they cannot fight without money and bribery. In 1991, they bought maps of air defense areas from Iraqi generals, apparently their vaunted companions did not see how the air defense zones were located. In 2003, they bought the capture of Baghdad. In Afghanistan, they buy their relative peace for the cultivation and sale of drugs. Apparently, the Americans consider the losses during the capture of Mosul unacceptable. 27 Iraqi infantry and about 2000 "NATO advisers" have already been successfully deployed there. And this despite the fact that in the city they are opposed by about 9000 barmaley. In general, the impression is that the power of the US Army is very PR. Hollywood shot the new military epic Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk, by the way there it is shown how heroes are made from random soldiers. The irony of fate is that the film was shot in cooperation with China. In general, something so-so with the US military successes.
  9. 0
    16 February 2017 08: 19
    Quote: Jovanni
    And this stray dog ​​immediately rushed to perform! First of all, he called on Russia to "talk from a position of strength" ... No, the Americans are incorrigible ...

    --------------------------
    Obama licked at McCain and these are being taught.
  10. +1
    16 February 2017 08: 53
    Measure seven times, and do not do anything.
  11. +1
    16 February 2017 09: 02
    Well, slippers have sailed to the sofa, the Yankees don’t seem to have tactics or strategists, and they don’t have a war plan either, they don’t come up with everything, there’s an ambush and losses everywhere ...