President Obama, who is really, really bored with all of this “responsibility for keeping America safe” business, is so disappointed in America and Americans, and is very upset with reporters asking him questions that don’t inquire as to the source and perpetual state of his magnificence, has, after the Paris and following attacks that have nothing to do with Islam, claimed that he is the most manly–yet patient–terror warrior ever. Why, he has ordered the execution of thousands of sorties against ISIS! Oh yes. They’re not Islamic either.
For those not intimately familiar with the term, a “sortie” is a single mission carried out by a single military plane. In this case, military attack jets.
And if one were inclined to ignore the indisputable fact that one can tell when Mr. Obama is lying by the slightest movement of his lips, one might think those sorties amounted to actual and determined attacks against people who would be delighted to rape our children–both sexes–our animals–any and both sexes–crucify everyone in sight, and saw off the heads of any infidel they can get their hands on.
Then again, one might listen to the facts and the truth. Via The Free Beacon:
U.S. military pilots who have returned from the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq are confirming that they were blocked from dropping 75 percent of their ordnance on terror targets because they could not get clearance to launch a strike, according to a leading member of Congress.
Strikes against the Islamic State (also known as ISIS or ISIL) targets are often blocked due to an Obama administration policy to prevent civilian deaths and collateral damage, according to Rep. Ed Royce (R., Calif.), chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
The policy is being blamed for allowing Islamic State militants to gain strength across Iraq and continue waging terrorist strikes throughout the region and beyond, according to Royce and former military leaders who spoke Wednesday about flaws in the U.S. campaign to combat the Islamic State.
One can be certain those pilots are very cautious about to whom they speak on this topic. Barack Obama and Progressives in general tend not to be forgiving people, unless the people to be forgiven hate America and Americans.
You went 12 full months while ISIS was on the march without the U.S. using that air power and now as the pilots come back to talk to us they say three-quarters of our ordnance we can’t drop, we can’t get clearance even when we have a clear target in front of us,’ Royce said. ‘I don’t understand this strategy at all because this is what has allowed ISIS the advantage and ability to recruit.
Surely Royce and the pilots must be exaggerating? Not so much.
When asked to address Royce’s statement, a Pentagon official defended the Obama administration’s policy and said that the military is furiously working to prevent civilian casualties.’
‘The bottom line is that we will not stoop to the level of our enemy and put civilians more in harm’s way than absolutely necessary,’ the official told the Washington Free Beacon, explaining that the military often conducts flights ‘and don’t strike anything.’
‘The fact that aircraft go on missions and don’t strike anything is not out of the norm,’ the official said. ‘Despite U.S. strikes being the most precise in the history of warfare, conducting strike operations in the heavily populated areas where ISIL hides certainly presents challenges. We are fighting an enemy who goes out of their way to put civilians at risk. However, our pilots understand the need for the tactical patience in this environment. This fight against ISIL is not the kind of fight from previous decades.
No it’s not. In those fights, we actually tried to kill our enemies and win wars, because when one does that with overwhelming ferocity and will, it ends wars quickly, saving thousands, even millions, of lives. Our military–that portion of it without their noses firmly inserted in Mr. Obama’s backside, which backside has caused many reporters such longing–knows this well.
Jack Keane, a retired four-star U.S. general, agreed with Royce’s assessment of the administration’s policy and blamed President Barack Obama for issuing orders that severely constrain the U.S. military from combatting terror forces.
‘This has been an absurdity from the beginning,’ Keane said in response to questions from Royce. ‘The president personally made a statement that has driven air power from the inception.’
‘When we agreed we were going to do airpower and the military said, this is how it would work, he [Obama] said, ‘No, I do not want any civilian casualties,’ Keane explained. ‘And the response was, ‘But there’s always some civilian casualties. We have the best capability in the world to protect from civilians casualties.’
However, Obama’s response was, ‘No, you don’t understand. I want no civilian casualties. Zero,’ Keane continued. ‘So that has driven our so-called rules of engagement to a degree we have never had in any previous air campaign from desert storm to the present.
We can be certain the French, and particularly the Russians, have no qualms about actually bombing the Islam out of the Islamists and their supporters. There is also a little known fact that should make the frugal American more than a little upset about these aborted sorties. Again via The Free Beacon:
The Department of Defense (DOD) paid $150 per gallon for alternative jet fuel made from algae, more than 64 times the current market price for standard carbon-based fuels, according to a report released on Wednesday.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) noted in its report that a Pentagon official reported paying ‘about $150 per gallon for 1,500 gallons of alternative jet fuel derived from algal oil.’
GAO’s report examined the financial challenges facing increased purchases and use of alternative jet fuels by federal agencies. ‘Currently, the price for alternative jet fuels exceeds that of conventional jet fuel,’ the report noted.
You don’t say. And by how much does that greenie jet fuel exceed the cost of conventional fuel? Take your blood pressure meds, gentle readers, before continuing:
The price for conventional jet fuel is currently $2.88 per gallon. GAO’s report reveals that federal agencies have paid significantly higher prices in an effort to promote biofuels in commercial and military aviation.
Uh–$2.88 as opposed to $150.00 per gallon. Uh…
HEFA is an acronym for Hydroprocessed Esters and Fatty Acids, and refers to ‘renewable oil (e.g., vegetable oils, animal fat, waste grease, and algae oil) … processed using hydrogen treatment (hydroprocessing) to yield a fuel in the distillation range of jet fuel and diesel.’
GAO interviewed 23 “academic, federal government, and private industry stakeholders” about challenges facing the increased adoption of alternative jet fuels. Twenty-two of them cited the fuels’ exorbitant costs.
‘Five of these stakeholders noted that for fuel produced using the HEFA production process, the cost of some types of feedstock—even before it is transported or converted—currently exceeds that of conventional fuel,’ the report says.
HEFA and other alternative jet fuels are currently produced in large measure by small firms that do not have the economies of scale to manufacture them in a cost-effective way.
To address that problem, federal agencies have been buying extremely expensive alternative fuels as a means of subsidizing those firms.
‘Some stakeholders (5 of 23) elaborated that since most fuel producers are generally companies with limited funds and small-scale operations, it is extremely costly for them to produce fuel in large quantities,’ the report noted.
Purchasing HEFA fuels, some stakeholders said, would allow those businesses to grow their operations and, eventually, market alternative jet fuels at a lower price.
Right. In a decade or so, perhaps they’ll have it down to $75.00 per gallon. But don’t worry, government to the rescue:
However, those HEFA fuels will still need to be subsidized to be competitive, GAO noted, citing a recent Federal Aviation Administration study.
‘Alternative jet fuels produced on a commercial scale using the HEFA process would require a subsidy of $0.35 to $2.86 per gallon to be price-competitive with conventional jet fuels in 2020,’ the report found.
Don’t military jets, particular fighter/attack aircraft with their enormously powerful engines with afterburners, tend to burn a very great deal of fuel? And if they burn that fuel for what amounts to joyrides on 75% of their military sorties? Golly. Progressives always complain about wasting fuel and the costs of our military, but they demand the military use these fuels, and prop up their greenie cronies in the process?
Let us never forget that military aviation is inherently deadly dangerous even in peacetime. Flying and landing with unexpended ordinance is even more dangerous. Oh, but the pilots drop all that ordinance in the desert or sea before landing? Isn’t that stuff pretty expensive too?
Hey, but we’re not blowing up people that support the terrorists that want to slaughter us, and we’re allowing Mr. Obama and his acolytes to maintain their deluded and self-imagined moral and intellectual superiority. Can’t put a price on that.