Earlier quoted context omitted.
do you have any sources for these claims?
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-09-10/competing-gas-pipel...
Any better sources? ZH is notoriously sensationalist and often completely wrong.
The Pentagon Is Spending Up To $2.2B on Soviet-Style Arms for Syrian Rebels
141–150 of 206 posts
Re: The Pentagon Is Spending Up To $2.2B on Soviet-Style Arms for Syrian Rebels
#142Earlier quoted context omitted.
Setting aside every other part of this discussion: I don't think a state actor can be accurately described as sociopathic. The expectations and interactions among nations are fundamentally different from those among people.
Then why is it so many other countries don't act as we do? USSR under Joe did; that's hardly a ringing endorsement. Any Scandinavian country would be a good counter argument. Finland has withstood Soviet/Russian intimidation for more than seven decades without running around instigating insane, right-wing police states across the Globe.
Inability, to a large extent. The relative youth of the US in cultural terms. the simplicity of dealing with a small biddable tyranny rather than a large messy democracy that might not agree with us. The Dictator's Handbook by Bueno de Mesquite & Smith does a good job of breaking down the utilitarian calculus of foreign policy decisions.
Re: The Pentagon Is Spending Up To $2.2B on Soviet-Style Arms for Syrian Rebels
#143Re: The Pentagon Is Spending Up To $2.2B on Soviet-Style Arms for Syrian Rebels
#144Earlier 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.
And Toyotas. Lots of Toyotas. https://journal-neo.org/2015/10/09/the-mystery-of-isis-toyot...
Fwiw, a site having months, even years-old, mostly conspiratorial articles promoted on their sidebars and front page should be a huge red flag. Nevermind the shoddy writing.
Re: The Pentagon Is Spending Up To $2.2B on Soviet-Style Arms for Syrian Rebels
#145The 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.
And protect their influence.
The US have never managed to secure any positive relationship with any secular/moderate Arab movement due to an mixture of commiphobia and incompetent arrogance within the western diplomatic establishment. Where as there is an relatively close relationship between most of the sponsors of radical Islamic terror and the US establishment through the gulf royals and their investment into the failing businesses of western dynasties and retired generals/admirals.
So the result of tolerating/establishing a moderate semi-secular government in an Arab state, tend to benefit Iran/Russia as we saw with post Saddam Iraq where the new government was forced to buy Russian planes and ask for Iranian support as the US kept stalling their attempts to buy American(mostly due to infighting between us suppliers) until half of Iraq had fallen to ISIS.
Re: The Pentagon Is Spending Up To $2.2B on Soviet-Style Arms for Syrian Rebels
#146Saddest thing is that most Americans are brainwashed by one sided mass media to think that USA is doing good and righteous deeds. Sad truth is that USA is for a century producing countless wars for its own interest, in which millions of inosent people died and left many regions in ruin and in bad relationships to its neighbors. Btw, i witnessed two of those pointless wars. Last time when as a kid in a capitol of Euro…
The winners will always have the privilege of rewriting history to make themselves look righteous. If Germany had won WWII, it would be the same thing except with a different set of ruling elites.
Perhaps we need to consider that governments as they exist today do not work, especially when power is held in the hands of so few people. The US congress (which has the power to kill people) is only made up of 100 senators, which is supposed to represent the views of ~325 million people. Doesn't that seem a little fishy? In the age of the internet, why can't everyone with a computer or cell phone participate in policy making?
Re: The Pentagon Is Spending Up To $2.2B on Soviet-Style Arms for Syrian Rebels
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can someone write an article about this??
About what? I mean, I disagree about what our (I'm French) are doing in some places, but its hardly been a secret. The CIA and it's equivalent are not working to get those countries to a stable state, they are working to get them to a non threatening state. Big difference.
Europa has multiple terrorist attacks, let alone wave of refugees from unstable countries exported that change the dynamics of politics that result in many changes societies including polarization.
Maybe you mean they didn't realize non-state treat is bigger than threatening state? I don't really understand.
Re: The Pentagon Is Spending Up To $2.2B on Soviet-Style Arms for Syrian Rebels
#148Earlier quoted context omitted.
"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 reco…
Also of note is the attacks on hospitals, al-Assad's very deliberate strategy of gassing civilian populations, Russia's use of non discriminatory weaponry such as barrel bombs, and especially their advocacy of political instability in Europe, including planting false stories of rape and genocide by muslims, and their cooperation with Erdogan in promoting said instability.
Re: The Pentagon Is Spending Up To $2.2B on Soviet-Style Arms for Syrian Rebels
#149It always surprises me that those intelligence agencies obviously think this is worth it, considering they certainly must be aware of all the potential drawbacks that occur when you fuel war and instability like that.
They must operate with totally different views of what constitute "good" and "bad" outcomes of the whole conflict. I guess you can justify all of that by just being cynical enough, but I'd like it if the military (at least in democratic countries) had to make their rationale for heating up conflicts transparent to the civilian world.
Re: The Pentagon Is Spending Up To $2.2B on Soviet-Style Arms for Syrian Rebels
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The same documents confirm the CIA has been arming Al Qaeda in Syria. That's not true. The U.S. has never armed al Qaeda in Syria (al Nusra). The U.S. has bombed them[1], and cut off arms to other groups when it looked like there was a possibility of them getting into al Qaeda's/al Nusra's hands[2]. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/20/world/middleeast/us-airst... [2] http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-cri…
> The U.S. has never armed al Qaeda in Syria (al Nusra). That's not true[1]. The USAF might have bombed them, the CIA certainly supported them. The war between the CIA and DoD is described here [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Division_(Syrian_rebe... [2] http://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-cia-pentagon-i...
From your first link:
> The group received funding, including salaries for its fighters, from the CIA, before being cut off in December 2014 following battlefield reversals at the hands of the al-Nusra Front.
> In mid-2015 the group renewed cooperation with the al-Nusra Front as part of the Army of Conquest during the northwestern Syria offensive (April–June 2015).
The CIA having supported groups that have at times worked with al Qaeda in Syria (and at times fought against them) is quite different from the CIA arming al Qaeda.
The only mention of al Qaeda/al Nusra in your second link is this:
> President Obama this month authorized a new Pentagon plan to train and arm Syrian rebel fighters, relaunching a program that was suspended in the fall after a string of embarrassing setbacks which included recruits being ambushed and handing over much of their U.S.-issued ammunition and trucks to an Al Qaeda affiliate.