US has trained only 'four or five' Syrian fighters

Almost unbelievable staggering incompetence in the current US administration in US foreign policy against the Syrian madman Assad and vice ISIS.

While the Americans delay the Russians 'make hay' in Syria.

Never.... in all my long study of US foreign and military affairs have I seen such. Even Jimmy Carter makes this group shine.

'' A $500m effort to train Syrian forces against the Islamic State has resulted in only a handful of fighters actively battling the jihadi army, the top military commander overseeing the war has testified.


“We’re talking four or five,” General Lloyd Austin, commander of US Central Command, told a dissatisfied Senate armed services committee on Wednesday.

The training initiative is Barack Obama’s linchpin for retaking Syrian territory from Isis. The Pentagon anticipated in late 2014 that it would have trained 5,000 anti-Isis Syrian rebels by now.''

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/sep/16/us-military-syrian-isis-fighters

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/11880974/Russia-begins-military-operations-in-Syria-as-Putin-sends-28-jets.html

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/10/us-mideast-crisis-syria-exclusive-idUSKCN0R91H720150910

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/14/russia-sends-artillery-and-tanks-to-syria-as-part-of-continued-military-buildup

Not all inclusive JAW..there are other examples where it worked just fine...consider the creation of NATO ala the Marshall plan; which in effect rebuilt the militaries of western Europe after WW2. Thru either direct monetary ail..replacement of stocks and training of allied forces in the US and bases in Europe.

2nd example is Japan and South Korea. This primarily US funded and maintained to a large degree yet today.

Corruption,ntl remains a problem and in specific cases I can agree there....


The problem yet remains that how do you tell corrupt from non corrupt which historically might have been or become corrupt once again.

It's a never ending crap shoot based on the analysis of the wizards in the puzzle palace. And the much over credited, 'alleged' experts in academia and government reference foreign affairs. In turn based on their evaluation of a national security threat; as then promulgated by an administration to the public.

Should we have established 'lend lease' for the Soviets... aided the Communist Chinese under Mao in WW2...depends on perspective and context and era.

But what I can say that is no matter the decision making ya don't drop half a billion and end up with 5 guys to show for it.

That's an indicator that your Chain of command is not enthused about it in the first place and the foiking decision never should have been made reference the free Syrians...

(because in the end, ya can't win a theological conflict by half measures if any at all and that's what this sheet is all about...Islamic theological differences from their perspective even given the more secular alleged posture of the former)

...the better bet was the Kurds...and we already know why that has yet to come to fruition.

Throw in Obama's philosophy of America is not exceptional and his focus of non military action unless absolutely met with fierce opposition..case in point, he's agreed to leave approx 10,000 in Afghanistan....and ya have the setting resulting in what we saw with this program.

This particular admins foreign policy, military action or non, remains a fiasco and failure.

CV

Whether they were as u note 'ill conceived' remains subjective...The administration at the time was reacting to a perceived threat as identified by those ie..their version-supporters; I spoke of earlier.

Was there a better option? Several. And one of which was proposed and rejected; and that was an ongoing aerial destruction of Iraq's military infrastructure less an on the ground invasion..vice 41 or 43's rhetoric.

Tho 41' gets credit for stating more clearly his coalition's objectives and adhering to his commitment.

The problem from a mil perspective, under 43, became apparent early on..and it was never the idea of losing a ground war or even fighting one...

I know I sat in on many planning sessions..dealing with intel analysis of a perceived threat...and probabilities of the success of sustained conflict.

The issue became one of political strategy...iow. attempting nation state rebuilding from a western perspective for 'alleged' more secular Islamists..under the auspices of riding them of tyrants...and ongoing maint of it as deemed necessary. And reaping the economic gains if successful btw.

(That it could be done was proven successfully in Bosnia.)

Or peremptory action and assistance to opposition, without total commitment.

Because Iraq and Astan are not western in thought or culture completely, no matter the alleged secular elements within.

And whoever thought they were in toto; and went with a nation state rebuild western model, as a rationale for conflict; has never understood the region or the history of it.


And in particular the centuries old internecine theological conflicts between the major parties of Islam. To assume that Sunni would lie down with Shia.. especially the fanatics among them was ridiculous.

In the end, in addition to the trillions and innumerable loss of life; some of which were from close allies the loss has been the influence and prestige that the US once held around the planet.

And afaic, that has been exacerbated by the current admin...for in the end they too have taken 'half measures' in their responses...and here we can agree...that wont work.

Either 'go' or don't go at all...and how one goes may be and should be varied. For as a former fighting man. I can guarantee u that we all hope for some form of resolution prior to sending in the troops.

CV

In general the quality of US foreign policy and secret operations of CIA have dropped to very low level. Th last 20 years is nothing more but the story of mistakes and blunders. USA is engaging into conflicts overseas without clear goals, efficient intel and understanding of situation. Even the war in Vietnam was conducted more profesionaly than anything that USA does in the middle east. The Russians have at least a clear goal - to keep Asad at power. What Americans want to achieve I have simply no idea and wonder if White House got any idea.... Meantime the Ruskies do much less, invest much less but achieve much more, starting from ukrainian issue and ending on syrian issues.
As citisen of the country which is an american ally I hope that next US president will be more reasonable.

Il est toujours sur la stratégie....

amen.