Under Trump, gains against ISIS have ‘dramatically accelerated’

Link

Nearly a third of territory reclaimed from the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria since 2014 has been won in the past six months, due to new policies adopted by the Trump administration, a senior State Department official said Friday.

Brett McGurk, the State Department’s senior envoy to the anti-Islamic State coalition, said that steps President Trump has taken, including delegating decision-making authority down from the White House to commanders in the field, have “dramatically accelerated” gains against the militants.

Combined Islamic State losses in both countries since the group’s peak control in early 2015 total about 27,000 square miles of territory — 78 percent of militant holdings in Iraq and 58 percent in Syria. About 8,000 square miles have been reclaimed under Trump

Flying under the radar, here is some more of that 'Trump effect' in action, and hopefully something that we can all agree is a good thing. The numbers don't lie, and it was as simple as delegating decision-making authority down from the White House to the commanders in the field. Who'd da thunk it?

Although the Trump administration has yet to announce its new strategy for the campaign against the Islamic State, McGurk cited “key changes” under Trump. In addition to the delegation of decision-making authority, which he said has allowed much greater responsiveness to opportunities and changing circumstances, he cited a “campaign of annihilation” that has concentrated on surrounding cities held by the militants before launching offensives, to ensure that no militants will escape.

He said the 2,000 militants remaining in Raqqa “most likely will die in Raqqa.” The United Nations has estimated that 25,000 civilians also remain in the city.

Sounds like a pretty good plan to me, and since Raqqa is the capital of their so called caliphate and headquarters, taking control of it would be a huge blow to ISIS.

McGurk described extensive preparations, while emphasizing that the United States is not interested in reconstruction or nation-building. Instead, he said, U.S. and partner nations are removing mines, clearing rubble and making sure that basic services — electricity, sewage and water — are operational to allow displaced residents to return under the leadership of local councils.

“People say, ‘We want you to run the hospital, the schools.’ We say, ‘No, we’re not very good at that.’ It’s not our responsibility,” McGurk said.

Among the successes of the current policy, he said, are the near-cessation of civilian displacements inside Syria and Iraq, and the return of hundreds of thousands of displaced civilians to their homes in places previously occupied by the Islamic State.

How it should be, simple and effective. If there is anything that can put Trump above his predecessors, in my opinion, it will be his fight against terrorism. Will he ever completey stop ISIS? Probably not, who knows, but apparently more is being done now, than ever before.

In general, I don't think there are many people that would doubt his sincerity or question his intentions in this fight.

yea right . thats why the bastards getting more active in s.e asia now .
With the philippines military working on retaking marawi from them and martial law in effect in southern philippines until end of the year at very least .

Then theres the 60+ IS cells in indonesia waiting for chance to strike that was announced by the head of the indonesian police .

Along with arrests of IS militants in malaysia and here in singapore over the past couple years with more crawling out of the woodwork .

Bull# on trump getting rid of the bastards all theyve done is spread them out to new areas .

Meh carry on with your misguided belief that the IS problem was dealt with by trump .

Gains against ISIS have ‘dramatically accelerated’ since:
Russian military intervention in the Syrian Civil War

They was supposed to already be gone. Did Donnie lose his calendar because he said they would be defeated in 30 days if elected.

a reply to: VengefulGhost

I never said anything about Trump getting rid of anything or having already dealt with any problem..

I just said it's good that he's taken the steps to.

I think they would've have spreaded regardless, unless you think this is all some pointless endeavor?

originally posted by: VengefulGhost
yea right . thats why the bastards getting more active in s.e asia now .
With the philippines military working on retaking marawi from them and martial law in effect in southern philippines until end of the year at very least .

Then theres the 60+ IS cells in indonesia waiting for chance to strike that was announced by the head of the indonesian police .

Along with arrests of IS militants in malaysia and here in singapore over the past couple years with more crawling out of the woodwork .

Bull# on trump getting rid of the bastards all theyve done is spread them out to new areas .

Meh carry on with your misguided belief that the IS problem was dealt with by trump .

Damn I didn't know about any of that stuff. I believe you but would like to learn more do you have any links?


OnTopic: I think trump is doing a good job giving more decision making authority to the military leaders.

a reply to: buster2010

So because he couldn't do it in 30 days, it doesn't matter anymore?

He should instead ignore it?

I thought WaPo was supposed to be part of the anti-Trump agenda? But seriously, that's great news. I'm not a huge fan of Trump but people need to give him credit when he does things right.

McGurk described extensive preparations, while emphasizing that the United States is not interested in reconstruction or nation-building. Instead, he said, U.S. and partner nations are removing mines, clearing rubble and making sure that basic services — electricity, sewage and water — are operational to allow displaced residents to return under the leadership of local councils.

“People say, ‘We want you to run the hospital, the schools.’ We say, ‘No, we’re not very good at that.’ It’s not our responsibility,” McGurk said.

Not sure about this. What's the point of fighting in the first place if you aren't going to rule afterwards? But then again the nation-building hasn't been super successful lately, so it's best to try something different.

a reply to: knowledgehunter0986



At least he is trying to keep promises.

a reply to: buster2010

jeez you're a tough sell. Just cause Trump wasn't literal you're unhappy with the results. Your life must be filled with disappointments. I suggest you lighten up aye champ and not let your emotions get the better of you

originally posted by: buster2010
They was supposed to already be gone. Did Donnie lose his calendar because he said they would be defeated in 30 days if elected.

Yes. Let us make this into a negative point against Trump.

The people of Syria will soon retake their country from the terrorists. But Trump didn't do it in 30 days. So it's a bad thing?

Not surprised by this from you of course since your chosen candidate wanted to directly aid to the Islamic State by, in everything but name, declaring war on Syria itself.

Trump has, except for the stumble here and there, handled Syria very well. His ending support for the terrorists was probably the best thing his administration has done to date.

originally posted by: Cutepants

Not sure about this. What's the point of fighting in the first place if you aren't going to rule afterwards? But then again the nation-building hasn't been super successful lately, so it's best to try something different.

Syria already has a government. I think the people who have fought for 6 years to defend their country would be mighty peeved if America decided it would decide their future now.

I don't think anyone wants a second Iraq.

a reply to: Ohanka

Yeah, as I said it hasn't been working out. Although I think everyone there already is pretty peeved. Isn't that the whole point of fighting a war, to decide people's futures? America and Russia aren't fighting there just from the goodness of their hearts anyway, I guess it's about the oil lines too.

The problem with a hands-off approach after a war is that someone else fills the vacuum of power if you don't. Someone who has the might to back it up. And if you pull your might away then your best local supporters might be in a lot of trouble, that's not nice either.

Just saying it's not so simple. But I agree, it's not worth it.

originally posted by: knowledgehunter0986
a reply to: buster2010

So because he couldn't do it in 30 days, it doesn't matter anymore?

He should instead ignore it?

No just showing another one of his broken promises. ISIS is yet another one of our messes that we need to clean up.

a reply to: Cutepants

You make some good points. It probably does have to do with the oil as well, since he has said openly that the US should've took Iraq's.

Maybe killing 2 birds with one stone?

a reply to: Ohanka

Not surprised by this from you of course since your chosen candidate wanted to directly aid to the Islamic State by, in everything but name, declaring war on Syria itself.

Wrong this is what my chosen candidate said about ISIS.

A Global Threat That Must Be Stopped: ISIS is an incredibly dangerous, powerful, and barbaric organization. For the sake of people in the Middle East and all over the world, they must be stopped.

I supported Sanders not chairman Mao in a pantsuit.

a reply to: buster2010

Yea a mess he had no part in and could be entirely blamed on Killary Clinton.

I don't think anyone believed it could be done in 30 days. That seems to be more important to you than his supporters for some reason..

a reply to: buster2010

Lol.....that's all you got? I suppose 8 years wasn't enough time for the previous Admin, huh?

originally posted by: knowledgehunter0986

In general, I don't think there are many people that would doubt his sincerity or question his intentions in this fight.

I question everything about Trump...at any time, it's safer that way. Still I guess he did kill a lot of concrete at that Syrian airfield though.
Next thing we know he'll be parting the Red Sea...Nah! somebody beat him too it!

a reply to: knowledgehunter0986

I'm not trying to blame Trump for any oil related wars either, he didn't come up with that. I just remember they where planning a pipeline for oil or gas, through Turkey and Syria I think. Right now Europe is pretty dependent on Russian energy, which gives Russia leverage. But I don't know much about it so I can't say one way or the other.