Live data from Hacker News

The Pentagon Is Spending Up To $2.2B on Soviet-Style Arms for Syrian Rebels

occrp.org

61–70 of 206 posts

Re: The Pentagon Is Spending Up To $2.2B on Soviet-Style Arms for Syrian Rebels

#61
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you miss the part where the U.S. has been giving tremendous support to the SDF/YPG in its fight against ISIS?

This literally started a couple of months ago under Trump, along with ending CIA's weapons running program. Here Trump truly deserves credit and outshines Nobel Peace laureate Obama. If he removes PKK from the US list of terrorist groups, that would be a 3 for 3 for him, although I'm not holding my breath.

US has been supporting the Kurds longer than trump's term in office

Re: The Pentagon Is Spending Up To $2.2B on Soviet-Style Arms for Syrian Rebels

#62
post #13
post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone got a tl;dr about the motive behind all this? What does the US government gain by flooding the middle East with weapons?

The article says they are theoretically only arming groups that are fighting against ISIS. I'm pretty sure if they can defeat them on the ground without committing American troops (airstrikes can only do so much) and only spending $1 billion dollars they are going to consider that a big win. The sentiment of this question explains why even further. ISIS does very bad stuff and is a major problem, and we can all wonde…

The US already has troops on the ground, at least a few members of the special forces are working with the SDF/YPG on the front lines.

Re: The Pentagon Is Spending Up To $2.2B on Soviet-Style Arms for Syrian Rebels

#63
post #22
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So all Russia and Iran are doing is just trying to defend against ISIS? That's certainly one interpretation I suppose.

At this point, they are trying to support a secular and a relatively liberal (relative to an alternative) regime against ISIS and other jihadis, yes. To see an alternative, take a look at Libya after Gaddafi where there are literally slave markets in 2017.

Keeping a minority Alawite government in power is just going to keep leading to these Sunni uprisings.

Re: The Pentagon Is Spending Up To $2.2B on Soviet-Style Arms for Syrian Rebels

#64
post #3
post #2

The better link is the whole project page: https://www.occrp.org/en/makingakilling/ >Since the outbreak of war in Syria, weapons from Central and Eastern Europe have flooded the conflict zone through two distinct pipelines – one sponsored by Saudi Arabia and coordinated by the CIA, and the other funded and directed by the Pentagon. >A series of investigations by the Balkan Investigative Reporting Network (BIRN) and t…

Anyone got a tl;dr about the motive behind all this? What does the US government gain by flooding the middle East with weapons?

It's western policy to prevent any unified arab state to emerge from the middle east.

...not that the middle east needs the help dividing itself, but a pan-arab superstate would probably be bad news bears for the Med region

Re: The Pentagon Is Spending Up To $2.2B on Soviet-Style Arms for Syrian Rebels

#65
post #7
post #5

The US is literally sponsoring Al-Qaeda and its affiliates in Syria to fuel the proxy war against Russia and Iran and to hinder their fight against ISIS and other jihadi groups. It's 1980s all over again and a 16th anniversary of 9/11. No lessons learned.

So all Russia and Iran are doing is just trying to defend against ISIS? That's certainly one interpretation I suppose.

The proxy war against Russia is about oil. The US and its allies Saudi Arabia and Qatar want the Trans Arabian Pipeline to run through Syria. Russia is financially dependent on its oil and natural gas deliveries to Europe. If the US had been able to overthrow Assad they would have been able to supply Europe's energy needs from the Arabian peninsula and weaken Russia. This is old news, really. These kind of energy politics have been going on since the 50's. (https://www.ecowatch.com/syria-another-pipeline-war-18821805...) and have shown no sign of stopping (https://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/06/world/europe/us-seeks-to-...)

Re: The Pentagon Is Spending Up To $2.2B on Soviet-Style Arms for Syrian Rebels

#66
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At this point, is anybody surprised by this? I mean it does seem weird that you have liberals cheerleading for funding a genocide, and completely losing their shit at Republicans for trying to stop it.

Does it really seem weird? I mean in the last 7 months we have literally watched the liberal left eating itself. Everest college. Berkeley. Antifa. BLM. Everyone disagreeing with them being silenced and called out as a bigot or racist. If I flip on the news, I seriously don't event know what country I am living in anymore. Up is down. Freedom is slavery. War is peace. I've heard that before... Oh god...

oh please, save your hyperbolics. the US president went to bat for a group of white supremacists a couple weeks ago, so I think we have bigger problems than bored college kids and an overturned trashcan in Berkeley

Re: The Pentagon Is Spending Up To $2.2B on Soviet-Style Arms for Syrian Rebels

#67
post #5

The US is literally sponsoring Al-Qaeda and its affiliates in Syria to fuel the proxy war against Russia and Iran and to hinder their fight against ISIS and other jihadi groups. It's 1980s all over again and a 16th anniversary of 9/11. No lessons learned.

Did you miss the part where the U.S. has been giving tremendous support to the SDF/YPG in its fight against ISIS?

The US supported both Iran and Iraq in their war against each other, which makes sense if the end-goal was to weaken both.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Contra_affair

http://www.nytimes.com/1992/01/26/world/us-secretly-gave-aid...

Re: The Pentagon Is Spending Up To $2.2B on Soviet-Style Arms for Syrian Rebels

#68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Broadly, America has traditionally supported Sunni leaning states, most notably Saudi Arabia. Russia has traditionally supported Shia Iran, and both the powers are competing for influence within the region. In the course of the Arab Spring, the legitimacy of many ME leaders/dictators was questioned, among the most notable of these was the rule of Bashar al-Assad of Syria. A popular local outpouring of resentment agai…

"Russia has been targeting civilian population centers (with both conventional and chemical weapons)" citation needed

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/10/27/499578650/...

"This year, UNICEF "said it has verified at least 38 attacks on schools around Syria, whether in government-held areas or rebel-controlled territory. Before Wednesday's attack, 32 children were killed in 2016 in attacks on schools," as the group's regional chief of communication, Juliette Touma, told The Associated Press.

"A total of 60 attacks were recorded on schools in 2015," she told the AP, adding that 1 in 3 schools in the country have been rendered unusable by the conflict."

"At least 96 children have been killed and 223 injured in eastern Aleppo in the past week, UNICEF said Thursday, with some left to die on the floor of hospitals due to lack of medical supplies. Syrian and Russian forces have been bombarding rebel-held areas of the city for five straight days in what has been described as the most intense bombing campaign to hit the city since the war in Syria started six years ago."

https://news.vice.com/article/un-slams-russia-syria-for-kill...

Re: The Pentagon Is Spending Up To $2.2B on Soviet-Style Arms for Syrian Rebels

#69
post #3
post #2

The better link is the whole project page: https://www.occrp.org/en/makingakilling/ >Since the outbreak of war in Syria, weapons from Central and Eastern Europe have flooded the conflict zone through two distinct pipelines – one sponsored by Saudi Arabia and coordinated by the CIA, and the other funded and directed by the Pentagon. >A series of investigations by the Balkan Investigative Reporting Network (BIRN) and t…

Anyone got a tl;dr about the motive behind all this? What does the US government gain by flooding the middle East with weapons?

This is the reason Syria was destabilized by the US. Natural gas to Europe. Period. This is not about Assad, the US is simply demonizing him to justify their destruction of another secular soverign country. Russia supplies Europe with almost all of its natural gas. This is unacceptable to the west. What the west wants is to drag nat gas up from Qatar through Syria to the med and north into Europe breaking Russia's strangle hold on their nat gas. The problem? Assad wouldn't play ball. He refused to allow the pipeline to go through Syria. That made him a target the US had to demonize with fictitious stories of savagery he committed against his people just like with every other leader in the Middle East the US murdered.

So the US government declared him a savage animal and wanted to overthrow him. The problem? Russia was Assad's ally. And they refused to allow that to happen. They have deep ties with Assad. As well as naval bases in Syria. So that resulted in a proxy war. The US aiding, arming, and training savage barbaric monsters aka Isis, aka Islamic barbarians to fight for them to take over Syria. And the Russians, who actually are on the right side, who are supporting Assad and fighting these monsters.

This is all about energy folks. Natural gas and Russia's strangle hold on europes nat gas supply.

When you understand this, the level of barbarism the US is engaging in puts the fedgov in a whole new level of depravity in most people's eyes.

Re: The Pentagon Is Spending Up To $2.2B on Soviet-Style Arms for Syrian Rebels

#70
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this point, is anybody surprised by this? It's quite clear that when it comes to sponsoring groups in the Middle East, we just throw money/weapons at anyone, no matter who they are.

I've been saying this for years. "The CIA created ISIS. Not just funded, but created the situation where such organizations could come up." I constantly get criticized for this. "No, of course America isn't funding ISIS. We're fighting them." I then talk about The Bay of Pigs, the 1973 Coupe in Chile, Iranian Contras, The School of the Americas ... a criminal rap sheet that shows a pattern of sociopathhy by the US go…

You're right about ISIS for what its worth. The documentary "The Power of Nightmares" is a really good introduction to the background of that whole story for people who criticize you on the topic. Its very accessible and well researched (and from the BBC, so reputable).

But yeah, the short and long of it is that Donald Rumsfeld specifically disbanded the Iraqi command structure after the invasion, against President Bush's orders, because he believed (correctly) that it would result in large groups of them forming armed militias and start a middle eastern uprising. His belief, thanks to the teachings of his mentor Leo Strauss, was that without a mortal philosophical enemy the United States could stay at perpetual war with, the US, buoyed by continued economic prosperity, would continue drifting towards liberal ideals like economic, social and racial equality, and away from things like duty, honor, and fear of god; which in his mind, made America great.

In short, they believed the fear of communism is what kept Americans in line, and that the progress of the 60s, once that fear started collapsing, was something that needed to be avoided at all costs from occurring again. So they needed a new enemy, even if we had to make it ourselves.

Rumsfeld even, at one point, came out and explicitly said that that was his goal at the time, so its not even a conspiracy. Its publicly stated fact, that gets little to no news coverage.

Its like when Dick Cheney came out in an interview over the biopic he published, and admitted on air that the reason he was for torturing people [paraphrased]: "had nothing to do with intelligence. If we tortured suspected terrorists, no one would ever be able to call the Republican party weak on terrorism". He literally admitted to a war crime, and nothing happened.

Post reply on HN