ISIS Leader ‘Seriously Wounded’ By Coalition Airstrike
Islamic State leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, has been “seriously wounded” by an airstrike in Iraq, according to sources who spoke to The Guardian.
“The source said Baghdadi’s wounds were at first life-threatening, but he has since made a slow recovery. He has not, however, resumed day-to-day control of the organisation,” reports the British newspaper.
The U.S.-led coalition launched the airstrike on March 18 in the Ninevah Governorate in northwest Iraq, an area bordering Syria. At first, Islamic State advisers thought he would die and gathered to choose a new leader.
The airstrike reportedly targeted Islamic State leaders traveling in three cars in the al-Baaj district, but coalition leaders did not know Baghdadi was also in the convoy, according to The Guardian.
Al-Baaj, a Sunni tribal area, has been considered a haven for jihadis due to little state control, even under Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein or during the U.S. military presence in Iraq.
Baghdadi was chosen by a group of Saddam-era intelligence officials in 2010, intended to serve as the religious face for the Islamic State. One official was the mastermind behind the Islamic State’s rise in Syria, according to Der Spiegel.
Due to the power role of former Iraqi officials, it is unlikely Baghdadi’s death would devastate the organization. “Since Baghdadi’s wounding, Isis’s military and Shura councils have become increasingly prominent in decision-making, the source close to the organisation revealed,” writes Guardian reporter Martin Chulov.
Previous reports of Baghdadi being injured were inaccurate, according to The Guardian.
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
Former Pilot: It's Pretty Simple, No A-10 Means More Dead Troops
Retired Air Force Colonel Rep. McSally: Don’t Kill The A-10
Retired Air Force Colonel and Republican Rep. Martha McSally wrote an op-ed Monday in the New York Times arguing that the Air Force’s plan to kill the A-10 will satisfy leadership but result in dead American troops.
The Air Force continues to fluctuate on the arguments used against the A-10, but a consistent theme has been the use of budgetary arguments. Officials say that $4 billion dollars of crucial savings would be generated over five years by sidelining the plane. In other instances, officials cited a shortage of staff and the need to move A-10 maintenance crews over the to the F-35 joint strike fighter program.
Those reasons don’t pass muster with McSally. As she argued, if the A-10 is prematurely sidelined without a ready replacement in the wings, American troops will die, making budgetary arguments awfully hollow. McSally knows the capabilities of the A-10 all too well. During her service, she operated as an A-10 squadron commander and logged 325 combat hours.
According to McSally, the Obama administration has worked closely with the Air Force to end the A-10—13 years ahead of schedule. For a plane that is most capable in the entire fleet of providing solid close-air support, such an aggressive stance seems strange. This urge to rid the A-10 from the Air Force’s arsenal was brought into sharp relief by Air Force Maj. Gen. James Post III, who told airmen that if they testified to Congress on the positive capabilities of the A-10, it would be little different from treason. After major outcry and an ensuing investigation, the Air Force removed Post from his position. (RELATED: Air Force Removes General Who Intimidated Airmen Into Keeping Silent About The A-10)
Still, Air Force Gen. Mark A. Welsh has mostly brushed off concerns about the strength of the A-10, labeling them as emotional, given the fact that other aircraft in the arsenal can do the job. (RELATED: Air Force Chief Of Staff Has ‘Always Loved’ The A-10, But It’s Got To Go)
Some have pointed to the first round of F-35s, the F-35B, as a potential substitute. However, Michael Gilmore, director of operational testing at the DOD, put the idea to rest just last week in a testimony before the House Armed Services Committee. As Gilmore argued, “The A-10 can take hits that an F-35 couldn’t.” (RELATED: First F-35s Get Bashed In Hearing For Failing To Match The A-10)
Moreover, the F-35B is strictly limited in how long it can hover over an area and how long it can fly at night.
In contrast, McSally praised the capabilities of the A-10, noting that it can “loiter over the battlefield for long periods without refueling. It can maneuver in difficult terrain at low altitudes, fly slowly enough to visually identify enemy and friendly forces and survive direct hits. And it’s one of our most lethal aircraft, especially against moving targets, with its 1,174 rounds of ammunition, missiles, rockets and bombs.”
McSally’s arguments seem to have convinced many airmen, but the Pentagon and Air Force aren’t budging.
Follow Jonah Bennett on Twitter
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
WH Refuses To Deny Hillary Gave Favorable Treatment To Clinton Foundation Donors
Walker Dismisses Low Polls: We’ve Won Three Times In Four Years, It’ll ‘Happen Again’
In an interview with Fox News’ Megyn Kelly Monday, the Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker said he isn’t troubled by poll numbers showing him trailing Hillary Clinton in the Badger state, saying past history shows he’ll come out victorious in the end.
In a Marquette Poll released recently, it showed Walker trailing the former secretary of state 52-40 at this early stage in the presidential process.
“Every year in the state of Wisconsin, not just for me but for previous governors, when a budget’s out and the media focusing on the handful of things people disagree with, poll numbers are always down for a governor,” Walker said.
“In the end, I had poll numbers in the mid-30s four years ago at this time in Wisconsin. I was called by Time magazine ‘Dead Man Walker,'” Walker told Kelly. “And then when people actually saw the positive results of how our reforms worked, how property taxes went down for the first tie in 12 years. We not only won the recall election a year and a half later, we won with a bigger margin than we did the first time.”
“Polls are important snapshots, but in the end the only one that matters is on Election Day,” Walker said. “We’ve proven three times in four years in a state that hasn’t gone Republican for president that we can win by talking about transferring power from the big government special interest to the hard working taxpayers, and that’ll happen again here.”
No comments:
Post a Comment