because it s our guys trained by us who were in ramadi this is nuts. the idea is if you re going to have success, you have to have training and you have to have will. the idea that what the iraqis are lacking training is ridiculous. we ve been training them for 15 years. it s the troops haven t got their heart in the battle it will not succeed. and that s what happened in mosul when they ran away and that s what happened in ramadi when they ran away. the pentagon continues to have the different stories about air strikes and how much they re doing. we know definitively now from our people over there that there have been no air strikes in ramadi in the past 24 hours. it seems like there s this shift. and people trying to figure out what s going on. i wish i knew. i wish we all knew what was going on. and on this i agree with both of my colleagues. the president conveys an image of being passive and indecisive and that leads to an image of defeat. if you re going to be there, fight to
saying no, i don t think we re losing. and i just talked to our centcome commanders and the folks on the ground. there s no doubt there was a tactical setback though ramadi had been vulnerable for a long time pry mayly because these are not iraqi forces we have trained or forced. additional equipment, operational advice and when possible close air support, but the effectiveness of that strategy is debatable. isis-controlled areas have continued to spread throughout syria and iraq on the president s watch. this as isis overtook the ancient syrian city of palmyra, threatening to destroy anticties there as they did in mosul. critics argue the mission to degrade and not defeat is tan tamt to leading from behind. the president is going to have to scrap policies that aren t working. lay out a broad overarching strategy to defeat the savage
not being trained fast enough. it s not happening. and the problem is that the white house at least talking points are there is only two choices. what we re doing and reinvading iraq. sending hundreds of thousands of ground troops. there s a lot in between there. and the question is what if anything is the white house willing to do other than what it s doing right now? charles? the administration is sounding like baghdad bob during the invasion of iraq. they re losing. everybody understands that. isis it wasn t own that they took over in iraq but it took over the town of the city of amara in syria which gives them control of half of syria and later in the day to day, they took over a crucial crossing point between syria and iraq, essential erasing the frontier and making it easier to resupply ramadi. these are huge strategic gains. they re not tactical defeats. and what obama says it s not
in iraq. green lighting the quick delivery of a shipment of shoulder-fired rockets. this comes just days after the terrorists overran the strategic city of ramadi in the country s largest sunni province. we look at the president s policy tonight from the white house. on a day when president obama welcomed tunisia s president and designated his country a major nonnato ally the white house made good on a promise following the rout at ramadi. the president authorized sending 2,000 anti-tank rockets to help combat the massive suicide vehicle bomb that isis used in capturing the anbar provincial capital. blasts so powerful some were described as being on par with the oklahoma city bombing. white house officials say the rocket shipment is not a new strategy but consistent with its 36-month goal to degrade the enemy. defeat will take longer. in an interview with the atlantic the president said despite recent headlines things are not dire in iraq.