U.S. general says can't rule out 'boots on the ground' in Iraq

[Jefferson23]

As U.S. steps up airstrikes against Islamic State, General Martin Dempsey tells Senate that future scenarios, such as the retaking of Mosul, may require embedding U.S. forces with Iraqis.


By Phil Stewart Sep. 16, 2014 | 11:41 PM

REUTERS - The most senior U.S. military officer raised the possibility on Tuesday that U.S. troops might need to take on a larger ground role as they fend off Islamic State militants in Iraq, but the White House stressed there would be no combat mission for U.S. ground forces.

General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the U.S. military's Joint Chiefs of Staff, said there was no intention of placing American military advisers on the ground for direct combat. The U.S. plan relies on other contributions, including air strikes.

Still, he told a Senate hearing: "I've mentioned, though, that if I found that circumstance evolving, that I would, of course, change my recommendation."

Dempsey offered scenarios in which a larger role might be worthwhile, including embedding U.S. forces with Iraqis during a complicated offensive, such as a battle to retake the northern city of Mosul from Islamic State fighters.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east/1.616175

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

1. Well, some Republican actually did have one good point today.

We already DO have 'boots on the ground' in Iraq. He then, of course, went on to take that good point and follow it up with a stupid diatribe about how saying 'no boots on the ground' was 'disrespecting' our soldiers currently there. But the initial point did at least point out the flaws in trying to put out ones strategy in soundbites.

[Fearless]

2. If I was president I could promise there wouldn't be

And those there would leave. It's not that hard.