ISIS denies being substantially affected by the strikes, calling reports to the contrary lies and deception on the part of the media, intended to boost the morale of the losing Kurdish soldiers.

It says it did not retreat, just made some strategic withdrawals in order to lure the Kurds into a trap and kill them (which did happen at Makhmur) and because it left booby-traps at the Dam (also true.)

Apart from some simple tactical withdrawals that were carried out by the mujahideen troops to drag the enemy into elaborate ambushes and annihilate them completely; as happened in the Battle of Makhmur, where the Peshmerga were besieged, and the hungry lions of the (Islamic} State wound around them, to kill around 50 and take several of them prisoner, and destroy a large number of their vehicles; and likewise, the pulling out of the mujahideen from Gwer and planting traps, and the (Peshmerga} rats did not dare enter due to the intensity of their panic.

Besides these two areas, the (Islamic) State did not withdraw a span's length by the Favour of Allah Alone.

It points out that during the battle for the dam, two of its suicide bombers killed tens of Peshmerga troops.

And in the Battle of Mosul Dam the enemy fled after the immersion of the two martyrdom-seeking brothers (Abu 'Ubaidah AI-Leebi (Libya) and Abu Tameem AI-Maghrebi (Morocco) with their two VBIED cars into the midst of Peshmerga gatherings, which led to the killing and injury of tens of them.

It talks about its victory in

As for the mujahideen support detachments, they bombarded tens of barracks and gatherings with various types of mortars and rockets, and the strikes were precise; we ask Allah to destroy (them) and (perfect our) aim.

ISIS says they've talked it out and decided they will fight to the death. They are all willing to die.

We emphasise that the soldiers of the Khilafah stationed on t he gaps (of the battlefields) of Wilaayat Nainawa have decided on the matter and are ready to die; and have pledged to Allah Almighty that the lands of the Muslims will not be defiled by a crusader infidel or a secular Kurd until they pass over their dead bodies.

Had Obama limited U.S. involvement to the humanitarian efforts to save the Yazidis, as he said in his August 8 statement, or to areas where the U.S. had facilities or personnel (like Irbil), I don't think ISIS would have reacted by threatening the U.S. ISIS isn't dumb, it knows there are no U.S. personnel or interests in Mosul.

For the U.S. to go to war with ISIS in Iraq is just crazy. ISIS is even stronger in Syria, now controlling about 90% of the Anbar province. It made big gains this week in the towns of Akhterin, Dabiq and Turkmen Bareh, which puts it in a good position to take Azaz, and from there, the Turkish border crossing of Bah a-Salama. Once it takes the border, it will cut off supply lines to the Syrian rebels fighting Assad. Game over for them (and the hopes of the U.S. that the so-called "moderate rebels" would succeed in fighting Assad.)

Also Monday, ISIS battled in Sawran and Marea. Marea is one of the strongholds of the Islamic Front. There's a major battle coming in Aleppo (which as I wrote yesterday, fits with reports that ISIS has dispatched commander Abu Wahib there.) The Islamic Front has confirmed this, telling Syria news that it is coordinating with Noor al-Din Zanki, Haraka Hazam and other opposition groups in northern Aleppo, to battle ISIS and the Syrian Army. The Syrian Army is also preparing, and launched major air strikes against ISIS in the Raqqa area the past few days.

Unless the U.S. is going to go to war against ISIS in Syria as well as well as Iraq (unlikely), the most we will accomplish by attacking ISIS in Iraq is the equivalent of cutting off an arm. If anyone can fight with one hand behind its back, it's ISIS.

Obama's strategy is both tepid and dangerous. He's smacking ISIS on the knuckles, and in doing so, put a great big target on our back, not just from ISIS, but now from Al Qaeda as well, which just put out a new issue of its magazine calling for stepped up attacks in the U.S.

ISIS was not our problem. It was a problem of the Middle East. We had no business doing anything after U.S. advisers determined our military assistance was not required to get the Yazedis off Sinjar mountain. The Mosul dam was none of our business. ISIS' recruiting efforts aimed at foreigners have all been requests for them to travel to the Middle East and fight with ISIS there. There are no official ISIS recruiting efforts asking foreigners to attack in the U.S. That may well change as a result of these ill-advised airstrikes.

ISIS may not seek direct action against the U.S. in the immediate future, since it has a pretty full plate right now, but that won't stop the U.S. from ramping up surveillance here in anticipation.In addition to getting a target on our back, we will all have to live with heightened security and more privacy intrusions. What a mess.

I bet most Americans don't care one whit more now whether Iraq is a democracy than they did in 2003. At some point, the U.S. should reject the Bush/Cheney doctrine of forcing democracy on the rest of the world. It didn't work for Vietnam, it was never going to work in Iraq. The only people benefiting are the manufacturers of all the military equipment we keep wasting our money on. We should be investing that money here at home, for infrastructure, health care, and education.

Added: Graphic at top is a screengrab from an ISIS video.