Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel has announced that 1,600 troops "military advisers" are being deployed to Iraq, where they will "increase support" for those fighting ISIS. They're not there to fight, mind you. "Instead," Hagel said. "These advisers are supporting Iraqi and Kurdish forces in supporting the government's plan to stand up Iraqi national guard units" and they will "support intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance missions."
Hagel stressed "American forces will not have a combat mission," but was also sure to highlight the fact that we're "we are at war with ISIS, as we are with al-Qaeda."
As Dan pointed out earlier, Hagel's non-combat stance was almost immediately undermined by Gen. Martin Dempsey, who said that U.S forces may indeed be headed into the fight. Of course, Dempsey declined to refer to this as "combat." Instead, he seems to like the term "close combat advising."
This echoes comments made by John Kerry over the weekend who managed to almost-but-not-quite-but-sort-of answer the question of whether we're at war. For the record, we are. ...In a way. Actually, he said trying to answer that is a waste of time.
So, to sum up the administration's position on its own handling of ISIS:
We're at war, sort of, but we're also not really at war, but we are. Y'know, just like with Al Qaeda.
Our troops won't enter combat, have a non-combat mission, will only be advisers, but might enter combat.
Our men in uniform will be "supporting" Iraq and Kurdish forces, many of whom have proven that they aren't particularly interested in fighting.
...And just for fun, here's Code Pink - an organization whose members are famous for dressing as giant vaginas - interrupting Chuck Hagel's announcement by muttering, wandering around, and "acting war-like."
