Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Interesting article recap of Middle East

 

Yes, we need to deal with ISIS. However, what most Americans do not understand is that the CIA has provided covert support, weapons, materiel, and money for so-called “moderate” rebels, who became ISIS, Al Qaeda and Al-Nusra.
The U.S. did this in cooperation with our allies, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar, in order to overthrow the Syrian government, which, for all of its faults protected the freedom to worship.
  • Replies 360
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Posted

 

Interesting article recap of Middle East

 

Yes, we need to deal with ISIS. However, what most Americans do not understand is that the CIA has provided covert support, weapons, materiel, and money for so-called “moderate” rebels, who became ISIS, Al Qaeda and Al-Nusra.
The U.S. did this in cooperation with our allies, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar, in order to overthrow the Syrian government, which, for all of its faults protected the freedom to worship.

 

 

https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/23225#efmAGIAHu

 

"See last item - AQ is on our side in Syria."

Posted

 

Evidenced by this:

 

Al-Zawahiri also urged the Syrian people not to rely on the AL, Turkey, or the United States for assistance

 

Of course not, he can't publicly ask the people he's trying to convince that the US is their enemy to accept the US's help.

 

Just like the US can't publicly admit that we are on the same side as our the terrorists who killed 3,000 Americans.

 

Public statements seldom match the realities on the ground. The US is working with AQ on the ground in Syria and has been for five years. This is undeniable.

Posted

 

Of course not, he can't publicly ask the people he's trying to convince that the US is their enemy to accept the US's help.

 

Just like the US can't publicly admit that we are on the same side as our the terrorists who killed 3,000 Americans.

 

Public statements seldom match the realities on the ground. The US is working with AQ on the ground in Syria and has been for five years. This is undeniable.

 

You continue to look at it as a double sided match, when in actuality it's a three sided game.

Posted

 

It's more than a three sided game.

 

Which is more of a reason not to think that the enemy of your enemy is not your friend, which you consistently do.

Posted

 

Which is more of a reason not to think that the enemy of your enemy is not your friend, which you consistently do.

 

I don't actually. I just see the bigger picture which you continually downplay.

 

There are ZERO national security interests at stake for the United States in Syria. None. The only reason for the US to be involved in Syria would be to help the people of that country - which I'd be in support of. But we're not there to help the people. If we were, we wouldn't be actively working with jihadists to turn the country over to them and the Saudis. That will not help anyone in Syria, it will only further the bloodshed and carnage - and that literally is the only plan on the ground there at the moment: oust Assad and turn the country over to the rebels (who are actually AQ/ISIS).

 

When the US worked with the Mujahideen in Afghanistan in the 80s, at least the Mujahideen had not killed thousands of Americans. That partnership made sense because the Soviets were our enemy and the Mujahideen were the only ones actively fighting them. That's not the same with AQ or Syria. Even their proxies in Iran and Russia are not the same threats they were in the 80s.

 

For 16 years the powers that be in this country have browbeat the American public into giving up our bedrock constitutional protections because the threat of AQ was so severe. We were told the only way to keep us safe from AQ was to surrender these freedoms. And yet now we are working side by side, funding and training and sharing intelligence with that same enemy to align with them in a fight that does nothing to keep America safer.

 

That should outrage any thinking person with a US passport.

Posted

 

I don't actually. I just see the bigger picture which you continually downplay.

 

There are ZERO national security interests at stake for the United States in Syria. None.

 

ISIS is a legitimate national security concern.

Posted (edited)

lol...it's funny how it's presented but not so much because it's probably all true.

Edited by Dante
Posted (edited)

 

ISIS is a legitimate national security concern.

Watch Greggy skate out of this one by saying ISIS isn't Syria.

 

Bingo

Edited by GG
Posted

It's not skating. It's a fact. Isis is fighting Assad in Syria.

None it is not. Assad is hitting everyone but ISIS

Posted

It's not skating. It's a fact. Isis is fighting Assad in Syria.

 

Everyone's fighting everyone in Syria. It's a snake pit. Stop over-simplifying it.

Posted (edited)

 

Everyone's fighting everyone in Syria. It's a snake pit. Stop over-simplifying it.

 

Oversimplifying it is saying Assad isn't bombing ISIS and leaving out that's because the Russians are doing it for them since the Syrian military has been decimated fighting ISIS and AQ and every other rebel group in their country for five years.

Edited by Deranged Rhino
×
×
  • Create New...