Report: Islamic State Seizes U.S. Missiles in Iraq

[Intoxiklown]

Pentagon dismisses Iranian ‘propaganda’


The Pentagon acknowledged on Monday that Iraqi forces could have discovered a cache of U.S. weapons and missiles seized by Islamic State (IS) militants operating in the country, according to U.S. officials and regional media reports.

Iraqi forces combatting IS (also known as ISIS or ISIL) are said to have found a stockpile of U.S. weapons, including ammunition and anti-armor missiles, hidden at sites controlled by terrorist forces, according to foreign military sources who spoke to Iran’s state-controlled Fars News Agency. This is said to include a “huge volume” of advanced TOW II anti-tank missiles.

When asked to address the reports on Monday, a Pentagon official acknowledged that U.S. weapons had gone missing last year, but denied that the United States was intentionally arming IS or its affiliates in the region.


Link: http://freebeacon.com/national-secur...siles-in-iraq/

[Uriel999]

Yeah okay...ya know...I just hate it when my missiles go missing only to be found in the possession of terrorist regimes.

[Brian4Liberty]

From Rare:

Last month, President Obama and White House said the failure of the Syrian rebels who received American arms was not his fault. Instead he blamed hawks in Congress and his own administration. Apparently Obama forgot to say no when the program was proposed or something. The Pentagon spent $500 million to train 50 or so Syrian rebels, and only four or five are still fighting as of September.

But President Obama has been arming the rebels since at least 2013. The CIA has a program where it used Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries as intermediaries to supply arms, including TOW anti-tank missiles. The Saudis bought the American-made missiles and transfer them to the rebels.

Today in the Washington Post, there’s an article speculating that the TOW missiles supplied by the CIA are what drew Russia into the war in Syria. The missiles were extremely effective against Syrian armor and some even fell into the hands of groups like ISIS. And don’t worry, more TOW missiles are on the way
...
More: http://rare.us/story/president-obama...syrian-rebels/

[Brian4Liberty]

Surprise! ISIS is now using U.S. made missiles originally supplied to Syrian rebels

ISIS has acquired a very large arsenal of weapons in its campaigns in Syria and Iraq, including weapons provided by the United States originally intended for Syrian rebel groups.

In a disturbing turn of events, video released by ISIS shows that the organization is now using American made BGM-71 TOW anti-tank missiles.
...
http://rare.us/story/surprise-isis-i...syrian-rebels/

[timosman]

Surprise! ISIS is now using U.S. made missiles originally supplied to Syrian rebels

That's in addition to all the equipment delivered to them directly.

[Brian4Liberty]

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard: Administration Continues Failed Syrian Equip Program
October 09, 2015

Washington, DC—Following the Administration’s announcement regarding changes to the Syria train and equip program, Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard (HI-02), a member of the House Armed Services Committee and twice-deployed combat veteran, released the following statement:

“The complete and utter failure of this poorly conceived program was predictable from the start, which is why I spoke out strongly against it, and opposed it when it came before Congress last year. The Administration had no defined objectives, no effective strategy, and no way to ensure that these fighters and the weapons, ammunition, and equipment we provided them would not end up in the hands of ISIS, al-Qaeda, al-Nusra, and other Islamic extremist groups who are our enemy.

“Now, rather than end this failed program, the Administration has decided to continue providing equipment to so-called ‘moderate Syrian leaders’ who will give these weapons to whomever they like, increasing the likelihood that American taxpayer-funded weapons and equipment will end up in the hands of our enemy: al-Qaeda, al-Nusra, and ISIS, whose goal is to overthrow Assad and establish an Islamic state.”

Citing her repeated efforts to arm Kurdish Forces, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard said, “The Administration continues to put our resources toward failed missions and strengthening our enemy, rather than focusing on defeating our enemy and directly arming and equipping the Kurds in both Iraq and Syria who have consistently been our trusted, effective, fighting force on the ground against Islamic extremists.

“Moreover, until the White House comes to Congress for authorization to go to war against the sovereign nation of Syria, their actions to use taxpayer dollars to support anti-Assad fighters constitutes an illegal war that the American people have not debated or approved.

“We need to remember who the enemy is—al-Qaeda, al-Nusra, ISIS, and other Islamic extremists—all of whom are presently trying to overthrow the government of Assad, take over all of Syria, and establish an Islamic State.”
...
More: http://gabbard.house.gov/index.php/p...-equip-program

[phill4paul]

The CIA. Aiding and abetting the enemy since inception.

[timosman]

The CIA. Aiding and abetting the enemy since inception.

We should start feel sorry for the organized crime. What the heck is left for those guys to do ? Control McDonald's rewards ? http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...ial-Complex%94

[alucard13mm]

If rebels/ISIS used US MANPADS to shoot down russian planes.. all hell is gonna break loose.

I wonder if there is a reason for Russians to use older, close air support aircraft against ISIS/rebels? Perhaps higher chance of being shot down and escalating it more?

[Uriel999]

If rebels/ISIS used US MANPADS to shoot down russian planes.. all hell is gonna break loose.

I wonder if there is a reason for Russians to use older, close air support aircraft against ISIS/rebels? Perhaps higher chance of being shot down and escalating it more?

They have a crappy military. Every few months they like to talk about new technologies they are implementing and how they are modernizing their military but the reality is they are not fielding any new tech in significant numbers.

Essentially they are using what they have.

[phill4paul]

They have a crappy military. Every few months they like to talk about new technologies they are implementing and how they are modernizing their military but the reality is they are not fielding any new tech in significant numbers.

Essentially they are using what they have.

Sure. We could roll through Russia in a week. Tops. I honestly don't know why we haven't. Stone age vs. Star Troopers.

Perhaps we should just wait until the F-35 get's airborne. By 2037 we will definitely be on top.

[Slave Mentality]

They have a crappy military. Every few months they like to talk about new technologies they are implementing and how they are modernizing their military but the reality is they are not fielding any new tech in significant numbers.

Essentially they are using what they have.

I am also certain that the sensitivity training the Russian troops receive is horrid in comparison as well.

[Uriel999]

Sure. We could roll through Russia in a week. Tops. I honestly don't know why we haven't. Stone age vs. Star Troopers.

Perhaps we should just wait until the F-35 get's airborne. By 2037 we will definitely be on top.

The majority of their equipment is equivalent to the US in the 90s. They are overall a generation behind. They have developed a lot of new technologies but they don't have the money (well lets be honest we don't either but we spend it anyways) to implement a wide scale modernization. They are modernizing, but not in significant numbers because equipment is expensive. Ever priced a new thermal scope? I paid less for my truck than what the cheapest military grade units we use cost.

BTW, I never said we could roll through Russia. A fight with them (non nuke obviously) would be hard to determine because while we have the tech, they can fight with numbers. They would be a formidable enemy on the battle space. However, I never said anything to that nature so I am not sure why you are coming at me.

Just for the average infantryman we outfit him with a lot of gear and it costs a lot. Let me provide a basic breakdown of the USMC infantryman's kit:

CIF gear (includes all back packs, hydration sources, plate carrier, kevlar helmet, pouches, etc): 6,000 (this is accurate as of 6 months ago when I had my receipt to turn into CIF and it listed prices of everything)

Armory (these prices are what I remember unit prices being from when I was an armory custodian from 2012-2013):
M16A4: 900
RCOA4: 1100
AN/PEQ-16: 2200
AN/PVS-14: 3000
I don't remember the unit prices for the rest of the various armory gear we provided (weapons cleaning kits, mounts, broom handles, magazines, etc but it got expensive too. I was in charge of 4.4 million dollars worth of gear that only covered my company which is about 200 men.

Just what I remember though is 13k per troop. This does not include men issued M203 grenade launchers, M249 SAW's or crew served weapons. This also does not include the thermals assigned to Squad leaders that cost 33 grand!

I'm not trying to be a dick dude, but I only gave an example using the most basic part of the military which is the grunt.

I am also certain that the sensitivity training the Russian troops receive is horrid in comparison as well.

Can we please not talk about that aspect of the military. It makes me cringe.

[sparebulb]

This isn't the Soviet era military.

The Russian military has a renewed sense of pride and purpose that hasn't been seen for well over a century and a half.

The average Russian sees the threat posed to their nation, and the attempts to meddle with their culture and self-rule.

Anyone who underestimates Russian resistance does not heed lessons from history.

[Danke]

The majority of their equipment is equivalent to the US in the 90s. They are overall a generation behind. They have developed a lot of new technologies but they don't have the money (well lets be honest we don't either but we spend it anyways) to implement a wide scale modernization. They are modernizing, but not in significant numbers because equipment is expensive. Ever priced a new thermal scope? I paid less for my truck than what the cheapest military grade units we use cost.

BTW, I never said we could roll through Russia. A fight with them (non nuke obviously) would be hard to determine because while we have the tech, they can fight with numbers. They would be a formidable enemy on the battle space. However, I never said anything to that nature so I am not sure why you are coming at me.

Just for the average infantryman we outfit him with a lot of gear and it costs a lot. Let me provide a basic breakdown of the USMC infantryman's kit:

CIF gear (includes all back packs, hydration sources, plate carrier, kevlar helmet, pouches, etc): 6,000 (this is accurate as of 6 months ago when I had my receipt to turn into CIF and it listed prices of everything)

Armory (these prices are what I remember unit prices being from when I was an armory custodian from 2012-2013):
M16A4: 900
RCOA4: 1100
AN/PEQ-16: 2200
AN/PVS-14: 3000
I don't remember the unit prices for the rest of the various armory gear we provided (weapons cleaning kits, mounts, broom handles, magazines, etc but it got expensive too. I was in charge of 4.4 million dollars worth of gear that only covered my company which is about 200 men.

Just what I remember though is 13k per troop. This does not include men issued M203 grenade launchers, M249 SAW's or crew served weapons. This also does not include the thermals assigned to Squad leaders that cost 33 grand!

I'm not trying to be a dick dude, but I only gave an example using the most basic part of the military which is the grunt.



Can we please not talk about that aspect of the military. It makes me cringe.

This is true, and to add, you will not have much success on the ground with out air support. And we dominate currently, in that field, China is becoming more of a threat. We should have not scaled back on the F-22 for the F-35.

[Uriel999]

This is true, and to add, you will not have much success on the ground with out air support. And we dominate currently, in that field, China is becoming more of a threat. We should have not scaled back on the F-22 for the F-35.

The F-22 is the pinnacle of air superiority. It is also insanely expensive. The F-35 was supposed to be a cheap alternative but went sideways.

[Danke]

The F-22 is the pinnacle of air superiority. It is also insanely expensive. The F-35 was supposed to be a cheap alternative but went sideways.

One of the reasons is they went from over 800 to less than 200, so the cost per unit goes way up.

[angelatc]

Yeah okay...ya know...I just hate it when my missiles go missing only to be found in the possession of terrorist regimes.

And we would certainly NEVER intentionally arm moderate rebels. "merica!

[timosman]

The F-22 is the pinnacle of air superiority. It is also insanely expensive. The F-35 was supposed to be a cheap alternative but went sideways.

Wonder what your take on this video is - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icVhJ7opENE

[pcosmar]

This isn't the Soviet era military.

The Russian military has a renewed sense of pride and purpose that hasn't been seen for well over a century and a half.

The average Russian sees the threat posed to their nation, and the attempts to meddle with their culture and self-rule.

Anyone who underestimates Russian resistance does not heed lessons from history.

There are a lot of history lessons that are being ignored.

[pcosmar]

And we would certainly NEVER intentionally arm moderate rebels. "merica!

Moderate Rebels ??

if that does not make you ask questions,,,,

[Uriel999]

Wonder what your take on this video is - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icVhJ7opENE

Fantastic flying! Truly impressive pilots.

However, that doesn't translate into combat ability.

I don't think some of you are getting what I am saying.

To clarify, the Russians do indeed have a lot of tech equivalent to the US. HOWEVER, they do not match us raw numbers of that tech being issued across the board to their military. Showing a video of just a few jets doesn't show off the real potential of the Russian military.

Moderate Rebels ??

if that does not make you ask questions,,,,

I think that should be quoted a 1000 times.

[Brian4Liberty]

Bump.

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard: Administration Continues Failed Syrian Equip Program
October 09, 2015

Washington, DC—Following the Administration’s announcement regarding changes to the Syria train and equip program, Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard (HI-02), a member of the House Armed Services Committee and twice-deployed combat veteran, released the following statement:

“The complete and utter failure of this poorly conceived program was predictable from the start, which is why I spoke out strongly against it, and opposed it when it came before Congress last year. The Administration had no defined objectives, no effective strategy, and no way to ensure that these fighters and the weapons, ammunition, and equipment we provided them would not end up in the hands of ISIS, al-Qaeda, al-Nusra, and other Islamic extremist groups who are our enemy.

“Now, rather than end this failed program, the Administration has decided to continue providing equipment to so-called ‘moderate Syrian leaders’ who will give these weapons to whomever they like, increasing the likelihood that American taxpayer-funded weapons and equipment will end up in the hands of our enemy: al-Qaeda, al-Nusra, and ISIS, whose goal is to overthrow Assad and establish an Islamic state.”

Citing her repeated efforts to arm Kurdish Forces, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard said, “The Administration continues to put our resources toward failed missions and strengthening our enemy, rather than focusing on defeating our enemy and directly arming and equipping the Kurds in both Iraq and Syria who have consistently been our trusted, effective, fighting force on the ground against Islamic extremists.

“Moreover, until the White House comes to Congress for authorization to go to war against the sovereign nation of Syria, their actions to use taxpayer dollars to support anti-Assad fighters constitutes an illegal war that the American people have not debated or approved.

“We need to remember who the enemy is—al-Qaeda, al-Nusra, ISIS, and other Islamic extremists—all of whom are presently trying to overthrow the government of Assad, take over all of Syria, and establish an Islamic State.”
...
More: http://gabbard.house.gov/index.php/p...-equip-program

[jmdrake]

From Rare:

Last month, President Obama and White House said the failure of the Syrian rebels who received American arms was not his fault. Instead he blamed hawks in Congress and his own administration. Apparently Obama forgot to say no when the program was proposed or something. The Pentagon spent $500 million to train 50 or so Syrian rebels, and only four or five are still fighting as of September.

How does Obama get away with shifting blame to the Obama administration?

[UWDude]

They have a crappy military. Every few months they like to talk about new technologies they are implementing and how they are modernizing their military but the reality is they are not fielding any new tech in significant numbers.

Essentially they are using what they have.

wrong.

Here is an attempt to simplify the answer.

Every time there is a "training exercise" in the area of another country, it is considered a "provocation". Do you know why?
Because every time there is an amassing of enemy forces on your borders, you have to move your military around to prepare for defenses against a sneak attack. However, when you move your military around, then the people preparing the exercise get to observe your movements, and see how you react... ..essentially make you reveal some of your battle plans. Making you reveal your battle plans and strength is a provocation. Your military could put in a few surprises and diversion tactics, but when there are exercises every year on your border, pretty soon, you exhaust all options for defensive formations and realistic tactical and local strategic postures.

So why does Russia use older equipment?

For one, it costs more to maintain, whether in use or not. So a lot of the munitions are getting dumped in Syria because it is cheaper than safe dis-assembly.

But secondly, you never, ever show your hand to the enemy. So they are only showing off some weapons. Others are being kept at bay. WW III has started. Putin is using older equipment for Syria, the new equipment will be revealed against the enemies for which it was designed. IF Russia were to use it's newer technology, than the US would observe and learn.

Underestimating the Russians is arrogant.