Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

occrp.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 206 posts

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

#181

Post by baursak »

mengibar10 wrote: post #176
mentalpiracy wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have been supporting the Kurds, yes - but our support is schizophrenic at best. Though the Kurds are almost everything the US could want in a mideast ally - moderate, self-sustaining and stable, demonstrably capable - we will probably never embrace them fully due to our relationship with Turkey. Some backstory: Turkey lists the PKK as a terrorist organization, as Ankara and PKK have been fighting a separatist conf…

PKK is a terrorist organization because they have been killing civilians. Especially indiscriminate killings through bombings market places, public meetings. Most of the time their victims have been Kurdish people. A terrorist is a terrorist only when Americans are targeted?

Do you mind posting links from reputable sources (i.e. not blatant Turkish government propaganda)?

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

#182

Post by frandroid »

enraged_camel wrote: post #173
megous wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Turkey is responsible for executing 20,000 Kurdish civilians and destroying several thousands villages in the same conflict. They're still destroying Kurdish cities today, Sur, Sirnak, Nusaybin, Cizre, ... Burning civilians alive by hundreds in one incident. If that doesn't make them a terrorist organization... well, I don't know what to tell you. It's a war.

>>Turkey is responsible for executing 20,000 Kurdish civilians and destroying several thousands villages in the same conflict. They're still destroying Kurdish cities today, Sur, Sirnak, Nusaybin, Cizre, ... Burning civilians alive by hundreds in one incident. [citation needed] Turkey is definitely not blameless in this conflict, but I want to see some reliable sources for the outrageous claims you just made.

https://www.crisisgroup.org/europe-central-asia/western-euro...

https://www.voanews.com/a/un-accuses-turkey-massive-destruct...

http://www.dw.com/en/unprecedented-destruction-of-kurdish-ci...

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/feb/09/destruction-s...

On the executions: References 56, 57, 58, 59: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurdish%E2%80%93Turkish_confli...

There's way more, these are just the top google search results on each of these claims.

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

#183

Post by gras »

dragonwriter wrote: post #169
gras wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would Israel benefit from a stable Middle-East? I'm of the impression that Israel would want perpetual instability in order to prevent the Arabs from uniting and destroying the Jewish ethnostate, and that's why they orchestrated the war on terror. Funny that you mention Napoleon, he was allegedly funded by the Rothschild banker family as were the British; they funded both sides. It seems to me that Israel is doin…

> How would Israel benefit from a stable Middle-East? Israel-the-people or Israel-the-currently-dominant-political-faction? Because the answers are different and opposed.

"Rotschild Zionists", not the anti-Zionist Jews or gentile Israelis.

I'm having a hard time deciding how to group Zionist Jews (I think most Israeli citizens are?) that are not politically active, they're in a spectrum between the upper end of the gentile lower class and the lower end of the Zionist upper class.

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

#184

Post by FrojoS »

Several comments here blame profits of the military-industrial complex as motivation for these arm exports, yet these weapons are produced in former USSR countries not in the US.

I'm surprised this hasn't been mentioned here yet, since it's even in the title of the article. Of course, there are still profits for the US military-industrial complex. For instance the article states that "US-based Alliant Techsystems Operations" has a contract for buying these weapons from countries like Bulgaria. In addition, one can cynically assume that heating up the conflict will increase demand for US involvement and subsequent increase demand for US weapons. Still, I find it interesting, that after initially arming rebels with US weapons, the US switched to soviet-style weapons. According to the article, the rebels "were already using and familiar with" the soviet-style weapons. I would say that makes sense, but would hardly be a deal breaker if your main motivation was selling US weapons. This is not meant to defend US policies, but I think their geopolitical motivations are much more important than mere profit seeking and corruption.

By the way, this seems to be a very well researched article, thanks for the submission @rapeofthelocke.

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

#185

Post by gebruikersnaam »

Chathamization wrote: post #150
gebruikersnaam wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 w…

"In October 2012, U.S. officials acknowledged off the record for the first time to the New York Times that “most” of the arms that had been shipped to armed opposition groups in Syria with U.S. logistical assistance during the previous year had gone to “hardline Islamic jihadists”— obviously meaning al Qaeda’s Syrian franchise, al Nusra."

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-america-...

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

#186

Post by throwawayscw »

One of the stipulations for supplying these militas with BGM-71 TOW anti-tank missile launchers is to upload a video of them shooting their target to youtube.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BGM-71_TOW#2011:_Syrian_Civil_...

https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/search?q=syria+tow&re...

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

#187

Post by mentalpiracy »

mengibar10 wrote: post #176
mentalpiracy wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have been supporting the Kurds, yes - but our support is schizophrenic at best. Though the Kurds are almost everything the US could want in a mideast ally - moderate, self-sustaining and stable, demonstrably capable - we will probably never embrace them fully due to our relationship with Turkey. Some backstory: Turkey lists the PKK as a terrorist organization, as Ankara and PKK have been fighting a separatist conf…

PKK is a terrorist organization because they have been killing civilians. Especially indiscriminate killings through bombings market places, public meetings. Most of the time their victims have been Kurdish people. A terrorist is a terrorist only when Americans are targeted?

For the purposes of US foreign policy, apparently yes. Terrorists kill Americans, and the US won't deal with terrorists.

But if you don't kill Americans... well, then the US can label you separatists or independents or some other creative euphemism. If you're useful to them.

Cynical take, and I certainly don't agree with it myself, but nonetheless that's how it works.

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

#188

Post by [deleted] »

shitgoose wrote: post #131
wil421 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think happens when you are really fighting proxy wars with Russia? The enemy of my enemy is my friend. It's not uncommon to arm enemies after fighting a war. Look at Japan and Germany.

you mean that after defeating Assad ISIS will become another Japan or Germany?

[deleted]

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

#189

Post by wil421 »

shitgoose wrote: post #131
wil421 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think happens when you are really fighting proxy wars with Russia? The enemy of my enemy is my friend. It's not uncommon to arm enemies after fighting a war. Look at Japan and Germany.

you mean that after defeating Assad ISIS will become another Japan or Germany?

You should've said al qaeda instead of ISIS.

They will use the rebels to destabilize Assad's government and then try to install a US favorable one. One could say they are just using al qaeda, they are a stepping stone. I doubt either Isis or al qaeda would be the favorable government, leading to another jihad with the US.

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

#190

Post by riku_iki »

mengibar10 wrote: post #172
forapurpose wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The PKK is a far more complex issue. Their mission is self-determination for Kurdish people. After WWI, the Allied powers split the region where the Kurds reside, their hoped-for Kurdistan, between Turkey, Iraq, and Syria. They have faced oppression and worse (e.g., Iraq murdered Kurdish civilians with chemical weapons in the 1980s) from these governments for generations. In Iraq: In the contest with Saddam Hussein,…

In that case, can we then draw the conclusion that US is giving PKK all these weapons for a purpose beyond fighting ISIS?

Are all kurds members of PKK? Is there any evidence that US is giving these weapons specifically to PKK?
Post reply on HN