I’ve always found President Obama declaration that he will “degrade and destroy ISIS” to be odd. If he wants to destroy ISIS then he should simply state that he will “destroy ISIS.” Well, it doesn’t really look like Obama is in any hurry to degrade ISIS, much less destroy it, as Con Coughlin of the Telegraph reports:
The United States has blocked attempts by its Middle East allies to fly heavy weapons directly to the Kurds fighting Islamic State jihadists in Iraq, The Telegraph has learnt.
Some of America’s closest allies say President Barack Obama and other Western leaders, including David Cameron, are failing to show strategic leadership over the world’s gravest security crisis for decades.
They now say they are willing to “go it alone” in supplying heavy weapons to the Kurds, even if means defying the Iraqi authorities and their American backers, who demand all weapons be channelled through Baghdad.
High level officials from Gulf and other states have told this newspaper that all attempts to persuade Mr Obama of the need to arm the Kurds directly as part of more vigorous plans to take on Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isil) have failed. The Senate voted down one attempt by supporters of the Kurdish cause last month.
The officials say they are looking at new ways to take the fight to Isil without seeking US approval.
While I can understand the reluctance of the U.S. to supply heavy arms or allow regional allies to arm a group who would eventually use it against our interests, this simply doesn’t apply to the Kurds. The Kurds are reliably pro-American and have been for decades. The same cannot be said of the government in Iraq. What more do the Kurds need to do to demonstrate that we can trust them? If President Obama really wants to destroy ISIS wouldn’t it be logical to provide arms to those who not only have common cause with us, but are ready, willing, and able to carry out this mission? Unless, of course, President Obama isn’t really interested in destroying ISIS at all.