Even top U.S. general admits airstrikes-only war isn't stopping ISIS

If the objective of the war against ISIS is to make sure that under no circumstances will Barack Obama ever break his promise to "not get us dragged into another ground war," then congratulations. The man is an absolute rock when it comes to holding a position he thinks is necessary to avoid forfeiting political capital.

---

Now, if the objective is to defeat ISIS, well . . . that's not going so well. Not only is the fate of Kobani, Syria, highly tenuous - a dangerous state of affairs with the town right across the border from Turkey - but now the Baghdad airport is in jeopardy of falling to ISIS. According to General Martin Dempsey, ISIS has gotten to within 20 kilometers of the airport, and that prompted U.S. commanders to dispatch Apache helicopters to fight them off. Now Apaches are not technically ground troops because no one is on the ground, but the engage in a form of combat that's a whole lot different than dropping bombs - and as Dempsey acknowledges, put their operators at far greater risk because they're very directly engaging the enemy. So wait now. Why are we sending U.S. Apaches to defend the Baghdad airport when Obama said we were just going to do air strikes and our allies were going to dispatch ground troops? Oh. Right. Because as Dempsey implicity acknowledges here (hat tip to Noah Rothman at Hot Air), that can't get the job done: Strategically, Dempsey is right, of course. We can't let ISIS take the airport. No matter what. If that means Obama's precious no-ground-troops promise has to be compromised - or just outright obliterated - then that's the way it is. What you have to wonder, though, is if the commanders told Obama it's time to deploy ground troops and he refused, telling them they had to come up with another solution that had a chance of fighting off ISIS while still allowing him to say he kept his promise. Hence, the Apaches. The compromise that kinda sorta maybe might work while not forcing Obama to put himself in any sort of political jeopardy. Priorities. Meanwhile, remember all those military advisers and all that equipment Obama said we'd be sending to help the Iraqis? The Kurds are sending a message to Washington, which is, any day now:

In a letter sent on Oct. 2 to U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel that until now has not been made public, the Kurdistan Regional Government's Minister of Peshmerga Affairs Mustafa Sayid Qadir pleaded for help, saying that his forces still carry "outdated AK-47s, Soviet Dragunov rifles and other light arms." The letter, which I was given access to by the Ministry of Peshmerga Affairs, tabulated the surprisingly small amount of equipment received from international allies. In addition to AK-47s, the U.S. has provided fewer than 100 mortars and just a few hundred rocket-propelled grenades, or RPGs. The Peshmerga haven't received a single tank or armored vehicle from coalition countries. The problem is compounded by the fact that Iraqi security forces denied the Peshmerga access to the thousands of tanks and armored vehicles the U.S. left behind for Iraq when the military pulled out in 2011. Meanwhile, ISIS fighters have commandeered U.S.-provided tanks and Humvees abandoned by Iraqi forces fleeing from battle. The U.S. effort to arm and train Peshmerga forces is hindered by at least three factors. First, U.S. diplomats continue to follow the so-called One Iraq Policy, which considers giving direct assistance to the Kurdistan Regional Government -- whether military or nonmilitary -- a potential blow to Iraqi national unity. Whatever U.S. interest this policy may have served in the years before ISIS emerged, it now endangers our closest ally in Iraq and puts Peshmerga forces at a significant disadvantage in their fight against ISIS. Second, the U.S. continues to abide by the Iraqi government's insistence that all shipments to the Kurds stop first in Baghdad, where Iraqi officials can delay or even block the shipments from ever reaching the Kurdistan Region. Third, State Department regulations prevent the Kurdistan Regional Government from purchasing American-made weapons and equipment without "end-user certificates" issued by Baghdad -- certificates that the Iraqi government makes extremely difficult to obtain.

So we can't send ground troops to defend the airport because Obama made a political promise that we wouldn't, and we can't send arms directly to the Kurds because diplomatic niceties dictate that that's against the rules. Meanwhile, ISIS follows no rules apart from this one: Conquer. That's what the bad guys always do, of course. It's just jarring that the United States actually elected a president who is willing to make it this easy for them.

---