'Mad Dog' Mattis Says U.S. Now Using Annihilation Tactics In Fight Against ISIS

[DonViejo]

Source: Newsweek



BY JACK MOORE ON 5/29/17 AT 9:44 AM

U.S. Secretary of Defense James ‘Mad Dog’ Mattis announced Sunday that the U.S. military had shifted strategy in the battle to defeat the Islamic State militant group (ISIS) in Iraq and Syria, resorting to “annihilation tactics.”

Mattis, speaking to CBS’ Face the Nation, said the forces battling to end the group’s self-styled “caliphate” in the Middle East, had changed their approach from attrition—denying the group’s fighters of its bases and supplies—to all-out destruction.

“Our intention is that the foreign fighters do not survive the fight to return home to North Africa, to Europe, to America, to Asia, to Africa, we are not going to allow them to do so,” Mattis said. “We are going to stop them there and take apart the caliphate.”

U.S. generals are of the same view. Speaking to Newsweek on Wednesday, U.S. Army Major General Joseph Martin, head of ground forces for the U.S.-led coalition fighting ISIS, says that remaining ISIS fighters in Iraq had two options left: “surrender, or die.” Mattis—asked about mounting civilians casualties and whether this new “annihilation” strategy was causing them—said that such incidents “are a fact of life in this sort of situation.”

Read more: http://www.newsweek.com/mad-dog-mattis-says-us-now-using-annihilation-tactics-against-isis-617035

[Archae]

1. They have to.

ISIS is a disease. a mental illness.

It has to be eradicated.

[heaven05]

3. You like the current

administrations direction? Same should be done to n.korea? In your book? Total war will benefit no one, especially Israel and the mid east. This goes for E. Asia, the Philippines.

[Archae]

4. What else can be done against ISIS?

Negotiate? Don't make me laugh.

Give them their own state?

What?

[DK504]

7. Howsa about making the Saudis stop giving SO much money

to the terrorist groups. Howsa about we rebuild their countries since we flattened them by bombing the shit out of land? Howsa about we rerbuild schools? Howsa about we stop arms sales to these psychos? Howsa about we help the Kurds? Howsa about we put SO much pressure on Russia to stop backing a war criminal in Syria?

Bombing the shit out of them and killing innocent civilians aren't winning hearts and minds.

[heaven05]

10. yep

[Archae]

13. It's a start.

[Fred Sanders]

17. Also USA should pay compensation to the hundreds of innocents killed by America's criminal

targeting of civilian areas...the 140 recently killed in Mosul by a missile launched without regard to civilians nearby as the most recent example.

[billh58]

24. Trump apologists would

never entertain a logical solution to any highly profitable war -- especially one which guarantees extending the longest war the USA has ever been involved in.

[heaven05]

8. Don't make me laugh

the eradication of leaders and group infrastructure is necessary as it is a threat to peace. Yet I will NOT give any kudos to the madmen in the WH who would risk total war as proof of their ability to shape the world in their RW image. Have fun with your warlike dreams and fantasies...ever been in an after-action debrief? If so, when?

Tomahawks, much better. Siglint and humint, much better as finding ways to eradicate leadership. You don't care about the people that ISIS subjugates and are in the way of you and 'mad dog' mattis? Or are they just collateral damage on the way to victory?

[angrychair]

18. As the old saying goes

"Bombing for peace is not fucking for virginity"

[christx30]

5. It's not like fighting a normal military.

Where two military forces meet on the field of battle, and one ends up losing so much they surrender.

ISIS is an apocalyptic death cult. They aren't wanting territory for the good of their people, or resources. They want the war to bring about the end of the world. They use this to get recruits from all over the world. The only way to stop them is to wipe them out completely. They are never going to negotiate for a surrender, like Japan in WWII or Germany did in WWI.

It's got to be Sherman's March to the Sea for ISIS, both in the mid-east and the Philippines. Maybe North Korea can be a normal conflict, with China at the table as well.

[heaven05]

9. Ok, on the Sherman March

but you're not in that march , so go at boys while I sit here and watch it on CNN, MSNBS ect Total war, unless attacked, is archaic and a waste of human life.

Our technology can kill these people more efficiently than using our soldiers as an experiment in warfare and weapons madness. Go for your 'march'. Good luck.

[atreides1]

11. About Sherman's March to the Sea!

In case you haven't been paying attention, in the long run the defeat was temporary! There are more white only groups under this administration, then at any time in recent memory...and they're not only in the south, they've spread out all over the country!

What I'm trying to say is that you can't destroy an idea...unless you wipe out every single living thing that has grown up and been exposed to that ideology...are you willing to eradicate every single human being who believe in what ISIL is selling, man, woman, and child???

Are you willing to advocate for the deaths of hundreds of thousands, how about a million...how many deaths will it take for ISIL to become nothing more then a memory???

[KingCharlemagne]

21. "They want the war to bring about the end of the world." - They do not. Their war

aims are to restore the Caliphate across the great swath of North Africa and Central and South Asia.

If you do not understand your enemy's objectives, you are on the sure path to ultimate defeat.

[sinkingfeeling]

19. Ever hear of 'blowback'? That's how ISIS and all.other 'terrorist' groups recruit the young.

[hedda_foil]

2. Yeah. Good luck with that bubala

[Yavin4]

6. How will we know when it's over? How will we know that the objective has been met?

I don't see how there can be a success criteria.

[KingCharlemagne]

22. I vote for some mission creep. It worked so well for us in Vietnam, Afghanistan

and Iraq.



Come to think of it, our military has lost or stale-mated every major engagement since World War II.

[matt819]

12. And when this fails?

Sure, sounds great. And a lot of terrorists are going to die. Yay for our side.

And a lot of children are going to die. And the deaths of those children will create more terrorists, and not only in Syria and the Middle East. What are you going to do? Carpet bomb Manchester and Birmingham and Paris? And what about radicalized Muslims here in the US? San Bernadino? Dearborn?

This tactic, while satisfying to some - heck, to many - will fail.

Do I have an answer? Not really. Intelligent engagement with Muslim countries and Muslim communities worldwide would be worth a try. Results won't be immediate, and so it won't satisfy Mattis or 45 or their followers. It won't satisfy the Islamophobes, racists, and bigots. And it's hard. And time-consuming. Arming the Saudis and other Middle Eastern states to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars of weapons - to be used on non-conforming Sunnis and possibly Iran and Israel at some point - or transferred to ISIS itself in some form - is not the way to go.

Muslims have been fighting these fights and fighting outsiders for centuries. Memories are long. The buffoons in this administration can give themselves all the high-fives they want. And they will leave us, and the world, at greater risk.

[Kablooie]

14. No such thing as Annihilation when you are fighting an idea.

When you fight a country, government leaders hold the power. Eliminate them and you win.
iSIS leaders do not control a country government. They lead a religious movement.

Kill their leaders and new leaders will pop up as long as some people believe the philosophical goal.
Violence may decrease their effectiveness for a short time until they reorganize but the only way to eliminate this is to fight with alternate ideas, not with physical violence.

[xor]

15. Seems like something that is easier said than done.

Anyway, not going to cry over any annihilated ISIS psychos. I feel bad for the innocent civilians who are going to be caught up in more aggressive tactics. Then again, I feel bad for them being in areas controlled by ISIS.

[KingCharlemagne]

23. ISIS probably says the same thing about the innocents of Manchester. The UK, after all,

fully backed Bush's criminal invasion and occupation of Iraq.

[GulfCoast66]

16. Please correct me if mistaken

But it seems to me that with a few cosmetic changes they are following Obama strategy. Using local ground forces augmented by Western Airpower and special forces to slowly take their bases and kill them.

I have no doubt Obama would have agreed that our goal should be that ISIL fighters either surrender or be killed. Surely no one is suggesting he would be ok with them fleeing to the West?

I hate this administration with the very soul of my existence but we need to see things clearly.

I hope everyone had had meaningful Memorial Day holiday.

[exboyfil]

27. I think the biggest difference is that with Obama

except for the killing of bin Laden, the administration did not do a touchdown dance every time someone was killed. It was recognized for the gravity of what it was - killing other human beings.

It is a video game to these people.

[KingCharlemagne]

20. So says the war criminal of Fallujah (2004) - nt

[DeminPennswoods]

25. No quarter is fine by me

If these fighters wish to die for their cause, we should have no problem helping them make their wish come true.

[fleabiscuit]

28. Who's country is it? nt

[Sancho]

26. I just watched "War Machine" on Netflix...

nothing has changed.