U.S. attacks terror base

by

This is interesting…

BAGHDAD– Iraqi and U.S. troops targeted a hub for Al Qaida-inspired fighters based in Syria in northern Iraq over the weekend.

“The city of Tall Afar has been a suspected haven for terrorists crossing into Iraq from Syria,” the U.S. military said in a statement.

The battle in Tall Afar, about 60 kilometers west of Mosul, lasted throughout Sunday,, Middle East Newsline reported. Officials said U.S. combat units and Iraqi forces, backed by helicopters, battled insurgents for several hours before withdrawing from Tall Afar.

Since July, the U.S. military has tried to halt the flow of insurgents from Syria to Iraq. The military has conducted a sustained operation in the Anbar province along the border with Syria to stop insurgents and weapons.

Which begs the questions: How do you stop the infiltrations? Is it time to begin running punative strikes on Syria?

9 thoughts on “U.S. attacks terror base”

  1. I hope that after the election internal politics take a temporary leave and Bush will start whipping their behinds. What I would really like to see is Russian and American strategic bombers engaged on round-the-clock rolling thunders throughout the Middle East. Yeah, I know, the Russians would run out of spare parts after a couple of days. Dream, dream.

    Val

  2. All the pieces are being put in place for action on Syria or Iran after the clean-up of the Sunni triangle is completed and Bush wins the election. Who’s first depends on how close we think Iran is to the bomb.

  3. I sure hope you guys are right. My fear is that Bush will repeat his pre-Iraq dawdling, and that Iran will either make a bomb before we act or will harden/disperse its facilities (if they haven’t already done so) to the extent that nothing less than invasion would shut them down. It is dangerous for us to give up the initiative and hope that events (an Israeli attack, an EU deal, an internal revolt) will take care of the problem. I hope I’m wrong and that Bush & Co. are making the right plans. I don’t like relying on hope.

    I also think it’s unwise to assume that Bush will become more inclined to do things our way after the election (assuming he wins). Lessened accountability works both ways, and he doesn’t necessarily share all of our values.

  4. So much for Iraq not being a major front in the war on terror. Can someone explain to me how so many smart people can be so dead set against remaking Iraq? If Clinton were doing it, would it have been more widely supported?

  5. Let’s not get cocky about the election yet.

    I have no idea what, if anything, different Bush will do about Iran or other hostile entities. I suspect that an election will free his hand to do more. However, our ground force is stretched thin. I don’t think we can handle a land war with Iran right now, which is what we might get, in Iraq, if we go after them with air attacks or missile attacks.

  6. Yeah, we’re stretched thin. I suggest involving Israel and Turkey — that is, if we have not already done so and (WRT Turkey) if we can.

  7. “Is it time to begin running punative strikes on Syria?”

    Well past, I would say.

    “Yeah, we’re stretched thin.”

    Well, I dunno. It depends on whether we want to put “boots on the ground” in rural Syria or we can content ourselves with putting an aircraft carrier off the coast of Lebanon and flying strikes (missile assaults, etc) against Damascus itself.

  8. Iraq has 60% unemployment supposedly, IIRC.

    Sit them on the sand dunes and pay bounty for anything that tries to come across the border.

Comments are closed.