Sunday, May 6, 2018

Arming terrorists in Syria.

Whatever the hell we’re doing in Syria it most definitely involved the U.S. – that’s us – being in bed with the worst scum on the planet. 9/11 was supposed to have been about al-Qaida being our worstest enemy EVer, but . . . for the last seven years we’ve been ALLIED with them and feeding, paying, and supplying them in Syria. And what we didn’t directly provide, our precious “partners” in our greasy “coalition,” which is to say Saudi Arabia and Qatar, did with our blessing and cooperation. Ergo, “we” are and have been complicit.

The article from which the quote below is taken is an outstanding piece of work and is an excellent place for anyone to start to even begin to understand who we really intended to benefit in the jihadi/rebel ranks. A lot of sophisticated and deadly weapons found their way into the wrong hands accidental like, if you get my drift.

It disgusts me to see who we became joined at the hip with. And it was to oppose a decent government in Syria, both in absolute terms and relative to what else is in the general neighborhood.

And in 2013 the administration began to provide arms to what the CIA judged to be “relatively moderate” anti-Assad groups—meaning they incorporated various degrees of Islamic extremism.

That policy, ostensibly aimed at helping replace the Assad regime with a more democratic alternative, has actually helped build up al Qaeda’s Syrian franchise, al Nusra Front, into the dominant threat to Assad.

The supporters of this arms-supply policy believe it is necessary as pushback against Iranian influence in Syria. But that argument skirts the real issue raised by the policy’s history. The Obama administration’s Syria policy effectively sold out the U.S. interest that was supposed to be the touchstone of the “Global War on Terrorism”—the eradication of al Qaeda and its terrorist affiliates. The United States has instead subordinated that U.S. interest in counter-terrorism to the interests of its Sunni allies. In doing so it has helped create a new terrorist threat in the heart of the Middle East.

The policy of arming military groups committed to overthrowing the government of President Bashar al-Assad began in September 2011, when President Barack Obama was pressed by his Sunni allies—Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar—to supply heavy weapons to a military opposition to Assad they were determined to establish.[1]

And this is what Hillary Clinton, Ambassador Stevens, and the CIA Annex in Benghazi were all about. They were all standing hip-deep in slime. Fortunately, events on the ground have completely reversed the fortunates of the jihadis and there won't be any new terrorists threat in the heart of the Middle East.

Last word to commenter Rossbach:

This all makes perfect sense to me. We light a fire, pour gasoline on, then claim that it is out of control and that billions more be appropriated to put it out.

If this doesn’t smell like a racket, I don’t what does.[2]

[1] "How America Armed Terrorists in Syria." By Gareth Porter, The American Conservative, 6/22/17.
[2] Id.

No comments: