They Weren't Supposed to Have Chemical Weapons, but These Photos Beg to Differ
New evidence reveals that ISIS may be using brutal chemical weapons against their opponents. That report comes as some say the president's tactics can't possibly defeat the powerful Islamist terror group.
The White House continues to take criticism for what some see as a faulty battle plan against the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL, which appears to be using chemical weapons against its enemies.
Photos obtained by the Middle East Review of International Affairs show the bodies of Syrian Kurds who appear to have been gassed by ISIS in the Kobani region earlier this year.
Israeli Middle East analyst Jonathan Spyer, who edited the report, says the photos indicate mustard gas or some other blistering agent was used. The attack occurred after ISIS took control of a region in which Saddam Hussein was believed to have stored chemical agents.
Iraq wasn't supposed to have chemical weapons. That's what the media told Americans over and over. But the New York Times is now reporting that American troops were exposed to chemical weapons numerous times after the 2003 invasion of Iraq. According to the report, the Pentagon kept the discovery of approximately 5,000 chemical weapons a secret from investigators.
Meanwhile, President Obama is defending his much criticized strategy against ISIS.
"This is an operation that involves the world against ISIS," the president told reporters. "Our coalition is united around this long-term effort."
Still the White House all but admitted that an aerial campaign alone is not enough to defeat the Islamic State.
"Airstrikes will have an impact, but that impact is constrained by the fact that there aren't forces on the ground that can follow up on those airstrikes to end that siege," White House spokesman Josh Ernest told the press.
In Baghdad, CBN News reporter Chuck Holton says ISIS is doing a great job of manipulating the U.S. media.
"If they can threaten Baghdad and get the U.S. media all worked up in a frenzy over it, it's almost as good as if they took Baghdad because this group is very good at the media battle space. They're very good at winning on the media front," Holton said.
"And there is concern the White House will lose its allies in the region if the president is not willing to commit ground forces to doing the job right," he said. "And doing whatever it takes to defeat a deadly enemy."