“The cancer was within the senior level of the intelligence command,” one defense official told The Daily Beast. The pushback by the analysts has been described as a “revolt.”
Those are strong words written by my friend, ace Pentagon correspondent Nancy Youssef, who has uncovered another set of complaints that intelligence reports about the effectiveness of the US fight against ISIS, especially airstrikes, were doctored to fit administration contentions of positive results.
She takes pains to emphasize that the investigation is still in progress, and no conclusions have been drawn. But news from the front indicates that airstrikes in Iraq, and especially in Syria, are not making a major impact on ISIS. They are no substitute for popular resistance against the extremists and effective military action my threatened regimes.
And if that’s not enough to worry about, here are Nancy’s last two paragraphs:
“…in Syria, Russian strikes are helping forces loyal to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad reclaim territory in the city of Aleppo. Should that city fall squarely to the regime, Syria would devolve into a war largely between the regime and ISIS, leaving the Western world with no good outcomes for the fate of that state.
Were that to happen, unvarnished analysis on ISIS and the state of the war would be more important than ever.”