the most interesting stuff is later in the article:

[...] Last month, the U.A.E. carried out airstrikes against Islamist allied militias in Libya, operating out of bases in Egypt. The Obama administration was not consulted in advance of that operation, American officials have acknowledged.

While indicating a willingness to carry out airstrikes inside Iraq, France appears to have reservations about bombing targets inside Syria. But some Arab states appear to have no such inhibitions.

“Some have indicated for quite a while to do them elsewhere,” the first State Department official said. “But, again, we’ve got to sort through all that, because you can’t just go and bomb something.”

Iraq has a small air force and a limited capacity to deliver accurate airstrikes. The civilian casualties from some Iraqi attacks have been exploited by ISIS to try to mobilize popular support against the Iraqi government.

Much of the air campaign is intended to support Iraqi armed forces that are still in the process of being reconstituted and new Iraqi National Guard units, which will include Sunni tribal fighters but which still need to be established. A Pentagon program to train and equip the moderate Syrian resistance also has yet to be carried out.

The time-consuming mission to train these ground forces is essential because they are needed to control territory after ISIS fighters are pushed out, and the Obama administration has ruled out sending American ground troops. But it will slow the pace of the campaign.

On Saturday, Mr. Abadi sought to reassure Sunnis that Iraqi forces would not risk civilian casualties by using artillery or conducting airstrikes against ISIS targets in heavily populated areas.

“They have a very new air force,” a third State Department official said, referring to the Iraqi military. “Their targeting is not nearly as precise as ours and they have made some real mistakes.” [.....]