US analyst: Baghdadi is a devil we know and should not rush to kill him … we might intervene in Baghdad
"ISIS" organization might constitute a blow to the organization.
But added that we should not rush in doing a thing that we don’t know its implications, and warned of the possibility of sliding to a wide American war in Iraq to prevent the fall of Baghdad.
Fuentes said in response to a question about the analysis which considers that it is a mistake to assassinate al-Baghdadi considering him as "the devil you know is better than the devil you do not know", "I think that there is some validity in this saying, but the leadership is important, and if there is no charismatic leader in a group , the group's ability to attract more recruits will weaken and al-Baghdadi declared himself as caliph of Islam, therefore killing him would be effective. "
"But this step in serious because we do not know the identity of his likely successor, some leaders are acting in a narcissistic manner and like to make people know their caliph and what happened to them during their lives and how they form their ideas, but it allows opponents later to have a clear understanding of the psychology and psychological behavior, this is important for us because it allows us to know our enemy. "
About the way things will evolve through the process of sending troops to Iraq, Fuentes said, "It's open to all the possibilities, it can evolve toward a comprehensive war, and if other countries didn’t volunteer to send ground troops , we may reach the point where America must ensure the Iraqi capital Baghdad and other cities of the country on not falling by ISIS”.
US analyst said "I think that this is a matter of concern to President , Barack Obama who does not want to be the first American president to lose a war that his country has already announced its victory, the United States has sacrificed 4500 soldiers , 50 thousand wounded and endured financial cost amounted to a trillion dollars in order to achieve a particular goal to come back later and be exposed to a clear decline and third of Iraq fall by ISIS. "
Fuentes did not rule out that Washington would be forced to send military forces to protect its experts during their work in Iraq in the bases of hot areas, most notably Baghdad and Erbil, saying, "This is very likely to happen , we do not know the extent of the security rules as we have seen no evidence that the Iraqi army could provide guarantees that can be trusted to protect the sites, while the terrorist threat increases now, in addition to the increasing risk of violent sectarian conflict within Baghdad itself, there are daily attacks and bombings targeting Shiites and Sunnis as happened ten years ago. "
