|Lt. Gen. Sean MacFarland|
Mind you, the Pentagon is not claiming complete success -- just enough to keep the money and troops coming and the voters distracted. Defeating an alleged enemy would be akin to political suicide: In this case:
A top US commander has claimed the military campaigns in Iraq and Syria have taken 45,000 enemy combatants off the battlefield and reduced the total number of Islamic State fighters to as few as 15,000.But don't get too cocky or proud of the 'heros or ease off on the fear accelerator:
“Military success in Iraq and Syria will not necessarily mean the end of Daesh,” he said, using an Arabic acronym for the Islamic State group. “We can expect the enemy to adapt, to morph into a true insurgent force and terrorist organisation capable of horrific attacks like the one here on July 3 in Baghdad and those others we’ve seen around the world.”Just before the U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003, lesser voices warned that without an end-game in view, the situation would devolve into sectarian confusion and violence. And whaddya know, those lesser voices were onto something if America's longest war is any example.
What does the U.S. want?
What has been the result of its presence? (millions of refugees for one)
Why are the people dubbed "terrorists" unparsed and vilified without considering that perhaps they have something to be pissed off about?
Would you rather have your kids healthy and in school or shipped to Dover, Md., in a pine box?