Top ISIS leader killed as Pentagon moves to increase U.S. troops in Iraq
ASSOCIATED PRESS
Defense Secretary Ash Carter, accompanied by Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Joseph Dunford, speaks during a news conference at the Pentagon today where they announced U.S. forces killed a senior Islamic State leader, among several key members of the militant group eliminated this week.
WASHINGTON >> The Pentagon said it was moving to increase the number of American forces in Iraq and announced that U.S. forces have killed the Islamic State’s finance minister. “We are systematically eliminating ISIL’s cabinet,” Defense Secretary Ash Carter said today.
Gen. Joseph Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said recommendations on ways to increase U.S. support for Iraq’s ground fight against IS are going to be discussed with President Barack Obama soon.
“The secretary and I both believe that there will be an increase in U.S. forces in Iraq in coming weeks, but that decision hasn’t been made,” Dunford told Pentagon reporters during a briefing. He did not say how big that increase might be.
Dunford’s comments came as Carter announced that several key members of the Islamic State group were eliminated this week. According to a senior U.S. official, the group’s financial minister was killed along with two associates in a U.S. raid in Syria. He is known by several names: Abdul-Rahman Mustafa Mohammed, Haji Iman, Haji Imam and Abu Iman, Haji Ayman and Abu Alaa al-Afari.
In a separate operation, a U.S. airstrike in Mosul killed another top Islamic State leader, the official said. Carter would not provide details of the strikes, and the U.S. official was not authorized to discuss the operations so spoke on condition of anonymity.
The successful attacks are part of a string of strikes targeting the group’s leadership even as it losses territory in both Iraq and Syria. Dunford said there has been “indisputable” momentum against the Islamic State in recent weeks, as coalition airstrikes and Iraqi ground forces target the group’s leaders, command and control structure and financing.
“By no means would I say that we are about to break the back of ISIL or that the fight is over,” Dunford said, but added that there are a lot of reasons to be optimistic.
Carter said the senior IS leader killed was a “well-known terrorist” who had a hand in terrorist plots outside of Iraq and Syria. He said he was not aware of any link between him and this week’s terrorist attacks in Brussels.
Carter said he has been associated with the Islamic State dating back to its earliest iteration as al-Qaida in Iraq. He said he had worked under Abu Musab al-Zarqawi as a liaison for operations in Pakistan.
“The removal of this ISIL leader will hamper the organization’s ability to conduct operations both inside and outside Iraq and Syria,” Carter said at a Pentagon news conference.
He added: “Indeed, the U.S. military killed several key ISIL terrorists this week, including we believe Haji Iman, who was an ISIL senior leader serving as a finance minister and who also was responsible for some external affairs and plots.”
Asked about the impact of these killings, Carter said, “Leaders can be replaced. However, these leaders have been around for a long time. They are senior, they are experienced.”
The U.S. military has killed numerous Islamic State leaders in recent months. Earlier this month the Pentagon said it killed Omar al-Shishani, described as the Islamic State’s “minister of war,” in an airstrike in Syria. In November, the Pentagon said an airstrike in Libya killed Abu Nabil, another top IS leader.
———
Associated Press writer Qassim Abdul-Zahra in Baghdad contributed to this report.
17 responses to “Top ISIS leader killed as Pentagon moves to increase U.S. troops in Iraq”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
This war inexorably widens.
We need a major build up of our armed forces – – especially Army – – to counter act the Obama-imposed sequester budget caps that are rapidly hollowing out our defense establishment.
Far too many of our young people in college have the idea that the defense of this country is a necessary job just so long as they don’t have to be inconvenienced, let alone put at risk.
Thanks to the decision to move to an all volunteer force 43 years ago, we now have two America’s: the five percent or so willing to fight for America and the 95 per cent who languish in the comfort and safety provided by our warriors.
The threat of global jihad is spreading like wildfire despite the best efforts of our now exhausted ground forces who have had to absorb one deployment after another to hot war battlefields. Everyone now must have skin in the game.
The all volunteer force was a noble effort, but it is now time to re-instate the draft – – and this time NO deferments. Women, too, should be drafted give the success they have had lobbying for direct combat assignments.
The draft would be a disaster to our military readiness.
You’re partially right, but not in the way you probably intend. If there had been a universal draft, the Iraq war (the greatest foreign policy disaster in American history and the impetus for the birth of ISIS) would never have happened. But then, if you believe that Obama is responsible for the sequester, you are divorced from reality.
Somebody got drafted in the Vietnam War and didn’t get a college degree tsk,tsk.
These guys are Obama puppets trying to paint a rosy picture so he can leave office claiming victory. This president has allowed ISIS to strengthen considerably during his seven years because of his unwillingness to do whatever it takes. Yes, there has been some success but in the big picture ISIS continues to grow. The question we now have to ask ourselves is, which of our current presidential choices, if any, can do a better job?
If we wouldn’t have been in Iraq in the first place they wouldn’t be so strong.
Whatever caused this problem can be debated. The issue now is how do we fix it.
hiliar and obama are responsible for dismantling the mid east regimes that resulted in the rise of isis caliphates and exported isis terror attacks.
Nice. While President Obama tango’s in Argentina, he covertly flicks 2 fingers on his left hand and his top aid Goes scurrying. Two stelth operations are executed across the globe and two ISIL heads are rolling. The dance is done and a fine Argentina wine celebrates a successfull evening! The tango and the signal was as masterful Diego Maradona.
In the background I can hear the song from the rock group Queen, “Another one bites the dust.” Well done.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rY0WxgSXdEE Another one bites the dust. Official song for all the drone pilots, US Special Forces.
People seem to forget that George Bush (WTF)kicked the hornet’s nest by his ill-conceived and fallacious “invasion” of Iraq. That action only galvanized the Muslim world into their current frenzy and rage against Europe and us. How long must we keep our armed forces in the Middle East? Ad Infinitum? We need to take care of our country first.
Taking care of our country sometimes/many times extends beyond our borders. This is a 200 year old history lesson. Problems that aren’t “existential”, as our president says, can grow until they ARE. That’s why President LeadFromBehind is perpetually too late (aside from his instinctive dislike for his own nation). Pretend that ISIS is a JV team, do nothing (practically), find a much larger problem on your door step. Same with Libya, a failed state created by Obama without Bush’s help.
As to the Iraq invasion. A definite mistake, but not the source of islamic radicalism which was well underway beforehand. Al Qaeda? 9/11? Multiple terror attacks? And you blithely pass over Obama’s follow on mistakes– support for the Egyptian Islamic Brotherhood, failure to use his office to maintain a troop presence in Iraq (and pressure the Iraqi government), and his fecklessness regarding the Syrian civil war.
Just do it! Obama is on vacation again. He is a lame duck traveling the world at our expense.
Note the corruption of the press on display in this article: We have over 5,000 troops in Iraq, but not a word to that effect in the article. Why? Because it puts the administration in a bad light. Journalism in the us is dead.
So now #3 ISIS guy moves into the #2 position… and the war continues. Does the position really matter?
Reminds me of the movie Terminator, with the United States playing the role of Skynet with their drones trying to take down John Conner.
While eliminating the leadership is good, it is a game of whack a mole and someone else will move up and the fight will go on
until the West decides to do something serious about stamping out there rats.