In the history of mankind, many republics have risen, have flourished for a less or greater time, and then have fallen because their citizens lost the power of governing themselves and thereby of governing their state. TR


U.S. Begins Airstrikes Against ISIS in Syria

The United States, accompanied by at least a few allies, began its bombing campaign Monday against ISIS targets in Syria.

From the Wall Street Journal:

Using Navy Tomahawk cruise missiles and Air Force fighter planes, including stealthy F-22s, the U.S. carried out plans for strikes against more than a dozen targets inside portions of Syria controlled by Islamic State militants, officials said.

Adm. John Kirby, the Pentagon press secretary, confirmed the strikes Monday night.

Four or more Arab countries, including Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia, signed up to take part in strikes in Syria, with some flying alongside the U.S. warplanes, according to an allied official. Their participation was seen as critical to the success and credibility of the mission, helping avoid the appearance of a unilateral U.S. attack on Syrian territory.

The targets included buildings used as supply depots and logistics hubs near the Syria-Iraq border. But the U.S. also struck deeper into Syria, at Raqqa, the de facto capital of Islamic State, according to U.S. officials.

The expanded war against Islamic State forces propelled the U.S. military into an uncharted involvement in Syria, where it has little intelligence and virtually no ground support.

31 thoughts on “U.S. Begins Airstrikes Against ISIS in Syria”

  1. They said on Fox that Assad has not utilized his air defenses so I’m wondering if he is sitting on his hands and tacitly letting it happen or if the US and Arab allies have blocked them. I seem to remember from a few days ago that Obama said he would make an effort to not attack Syrian forces but only ISIS ones.

    1. From what I could extrapolate from the news, the bombing will prop up Assad indirectly. What a peculiar turn of events, what a peculiar president. Is ISIS moving the “red line”?

    2. Julie, did he really say that ? He would “make an effort” not to attack Syrian forces ? Well, then it probably means that he will attack them and blame it on a “mistake”. I suspect that it is the overriding goal with this mission disguised as something else.

      1. Sorry to reply late, but I went to bed after making my comment and then just saw yours now. I hope I am not wrong and that for once Obama at least has good intentions even if the outcome is up in the air. I learned this morning that Assad was indeed informed that they would be striking within Syria’s sovereign borders.

        I usually am one not in favor of the US getting involved in other countries problems, but I see no other option than in returning jihadi violence with enough violence to end it all. The fact that Syria is allowing strikes within its boundaries would seem to indicate that Russia and Iran have also agreed to be passive about it. In spite of the tensions between Obama and Putin and between the US and Iran, the whole world is threatened by the ISIS butchers.

  2. Tomahawk missles into Syria, blowing to smithereens places we think are controlled by a horde of feral murderers, but we’re not really sure because we don’t have any credible sources for information.
    It wasn’t that long ago when the Obama administration was chastising Israel for sending rockets into Palestine to force them to stop shelling Israel.
    Now, we’re shelling and blowing up people and places that haven’t fired a single shot into the US.
    I don’t think anyone near or in the WhiteHouse has any idea of what they have started, or how it will end. This is war, declared by the US on a ragtag horde of savages who are led by people we can’t identify, a civilian army without uniforms, without leadership, and driven by a fanatical interpretation of their religion.
    This is a lose/lose war. We lost before we started, and there is no end to it.

    1. It has been suggested that the ultimate end is a deal between Iran to finish it off and the US who would will look the other way on Iranian nuclear power.

      And,of yeah, Israel. History.

      The price of war.

    2. Absolutely agree, srdem.The “information” that the US trust and act upon is probably as manipulated as the “information” that we, the little people, definitely are given about this affair. It´s all so murky but there are some who knows what they are after and know the profits in all this ( Quatar pipeline, oilfields, petrodollar ). Once again the White House trust their Arab allies and agree to let their boys and girls fight in one of their sectarian never ending wars with all the risks involved for the American people. Also, to start bombing in Syria without that countrys government involved and without UNSC mandate is a gross violation of international law. Other countries take notice of that, I am sure. I am sure the Obama-Sunni coalition will take the opportunity to go after the Syrian Army as well in this attack disguised as an anti- terrorist mission. There simply must be many many civilian casualities here. I am so disgusted by this. The West should not be involved. Obama is dragging the US into another quagmire.

    1. I saw a list somewhere of countries Obama has bombed since the awarding of that Nobel Peace Prize — it was somewhere in the area of 7 — I know Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan.

      1. Yes Grace, I guess the Obama-prize is the greatest embarrassment ever to the Committee, and they do deserve the shame. But they could make it up by handing over the prize to a really worthy, great American, Edward Snowden. Well, you and I might differ about him but I, and many, many more, see him as a real modern hero. I think the world is a better place with people like him in it.

  3. Did they also bomb an aspirin factory? This bombing has no tactical or strategic value and is putting our pilots lives in extreme danger but hey since when does Dictator Obama and his fellow democrat party communists care about putting American lives, especially military lives, at risk if it will help them politically with the low information voters?

  4. Pretty much, and I know it sounds insane, but if anybody can do it Obama can do it. This will be sold as a US led coalition — everybody else will be doing the fighting (and therefore he can blame them) and the US is only providing cover and support, and therefore he is the good guy.

    The whole is it a war thing. A bit more complicated.

  5. Pingback: September 23, 2014 Grumpy Daily Headlines | Grumpy Opinions

  6. The New York Times is shocked and awed; their more dramatic reportage describes the US and allies as “unleashing a torrent” of missiles and bombs from the air and sea.

    1. This comment was suppose to be under Shofar comment at 7:33 am

      By the way can anyone give their best guess of why British army did not participate?

  7. Some how, some way this will all be the fault of the Israelis. When the conflict is not solved in a few weeks, and ISIS is still chopping off the heads of reporters, and aid workers, we will end up bombing more and more of Syria. Syria is a Russian puppet, and this will pull Putin into the mess. Perhaps this is what the “O” team wants.

    In the end, and I would guess very soon, the war will move into the Golan Heights, which border Syria, and the war is then put directly into and on to the Israeli people. Obama has never been a friend of Israel, and could use the ISIS threat to help push Israel back to the pre-1967 borders.

Comments are closed.