US-trained Syrian rebels give equipment to al-Qaeda group

[ALFREDO]

The rest of the world is waiting for Isis to come knocking on there door first.

Actually isn't Russia moving ahead with more commitment than the US?

There is a "soft" US President in the White House now.

After, that YES WE CAN change slogans, I thought Obama will then soon sitting with Kim Jong-il

and have breakfast in North Korea on short notice, but nothing such spectacular happened.

Cannot say that something really changed at all.

[maidee]

training the new bin laden

[ace]

Thought they only trained like 6 of those guys total. That's 1 pick-up each.

[Credo]

What, is this it, no more US-bashing? Come on, tell us how your country does it.

Most countries mind their own business.

And once you get your hundreds of thousands of migrants settled and your mosques built and your Sharia Courts running, let us know how that is working out for you.

[Scott]

Off-topic posts removed. The thread isn't about World War II.

[craigt3365]

What, is this it, no more US-bashing? Come on, tell us how your country does it.

Most countries mind their own business.

Do some research on foreign involvement in the Middle East. European powers were heavily involved. So no, most countries don't mind their own business....unfortunately.

[ABCer]

Most of Allies or Coalition countries' politicians are happy to

1) pay People's (public) money to make private personal money on Deals.

2) pay with other people's lives to force their ideology on their own People and other countries.

3) now they are going into 'expropriations' like in Sweden and Germany to accommodate 'refugees' - go to paragraph 2).

I hope people will not tolerate this state of affairs for long.

Edited October 5, 2015 by ABCer

[craigt3365]

Most of Allies or Coalition countries' politicians are happy to

1) pay People's (public) money to make private personal money on Deals.

2) pay with other people's lives to force their ideology on their own People and other countries.

3) now they are going into 'expropriations' like in Sweden and Germany to accommodate 'refugees' - go to paragraph 2).

I hope people will not tolerate this state of affairs for long.

BS. 100% inaccurate. How many high level politicians from these countries do you actually associate with?

The situation in Syria is very complex and not easily solved. Even with Russia's current bombing of everybody who's against Assad.

[GeorgesAbitbol]

Just look at the tens of thousands of young men running away to other countries.... Cowards !

Stand up and fight and die like a man. These cowards don't deserve freedom or even a helping hand. They want everyone else to do their dirty work and provide support.

Maybe because "everyone else" (read here USA and Europe) created this big sh.t in their country

[GeorgesAbitbol]

What, is this it, no more US-bashing? Come on, tell us how your country does it.

Most countries mind their own business.

Do some research on foreign involvement in the Middle East. European powers were heavily involved. So no, most countries don't mind their own business....unfortunately.

Nope USA are not the only ones. However they are the main responsible, they promote themselves as "the cops and beacon of freedom" in the world. USA went to Irak based on false claims.

Libya? they were the leaders of the movment.

Syria? Guess who?

Which country use its veto more than 200 times each year to protect Israel at the UN...

They are also very friend with Saoudi, a country which gives ressources to Al Qaida and affiliates movments...

If USA were less involved and didn t want to rule oil market worldwide maybe, just maybe there would be less problems...

[Credo]

The US involvement in Syria has been overblown. The US has been against the Assad regime going back to the father and the US had little interest in Syria. There is minimal, if any, business connection and it has no strategic importance for the US. The Assad gov't, going back to the dad, were busy playing nasty little tricks, like making counterfeit US dollars and other efforts at undermining the US and it's economy. There were other things the Assad gov't was involved in as well.

As a result, the US does not and will not back the Assad gov't, in the same way it didn't back the Castro regime. It is much more talk than action.

Assad is pretty much the sole cause of his problems.

[ABCer]

Surprised. Very surprised! Actually baffled.

I said I hope the Swedes and Germans will not tolerate these expropriations for long.

Response from craig 3365 and GeorgesAbitbol is: BS ... the situation in Syria is very complex, Assad is the cause of this problem, Nope, USA is not the only one responsible.

Reminds me a joke from my youth about three drunks trying to find the way home.

[FritsSikkink]

a violation of Syria train-and-equip programme guidelines.

This would be laughable if it was not such a serious infraction and abuse of resources...

The Syrian debacle and failure with US involvement will only add to the Obama legacy of head shaking foreign policies...

Under the Obama administration...the US has become the laughing stock of the world...no one takes the US seriously anymore...

The Chinese, Russians and Iranians are taking fully advantage of the weakness projected by this administration...

the USA were the laughing stock already with the Bush family

[Publicus]

Where is Europe???

It's that big lump between the Atlantic Ocean and Asia. Are you from America?

Try this then try again.

http://www.readingrockets.org/article/using-think-alouds-improve-reading-comprehension

[Thorgal]

Please do not confuse with the Toyota ISIS...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Isis

[Publicus]

What, is this it, no more US-bashing? Come on, tell us how your country does it.

Most countries mind their own business.

Do some research on foreign involvement in the Middle East. European powers were heavily involved. So no, most countries don't mind their own business....unfortunately.

Indeed, the United States after WW2 became the inheritor of the monstrosity called Sykes-Picot thanks a lot...to....for...

In the Sykes-Picot agreement, concluded on May 19, 1916, France and Britain divided up the Arab territories of the former Ottoman Empire into spheres of influence.

Under Sykes-Picot, the Syrian coast and much of modern-day Lebanon went to France; Britain would take direct control over central and southern Mesopotamia, around the Baghdad and Basra provinces. Palestine would have an international administration, as other Christian powers, namely Russia, held an interest in this region. The rest of the territory in question—a huge area including modern-day Syria, Mosul in northern Iraq, and Jordan—would have local Arab chiefs under French supervision in the north and British in the south.

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/britain-and-france-conclude-sykes-picot-agreement

France has not lived up to its responsibility in this. Britain has only mucked up things even worse. Russia continues to also stick its nose where it does not belong while China thinks being a Russian understudy in the region is a good idea. Iran's recent interest is religious-nationalist in nature.

The Assad family metastasized inside the deformed Syria configuration to contribute mightily to the ongoing mess. Pres Clinton in 2000 flew to Geneva specifically to meet with Hafez Assad shortly before he died on Assad's word of a peace agreement with Israel and new relations with the USA, which Assad then backpeddled on face to face with a deeply disappointed Clinton.

The next POTUS is going to have to take a very wet bleach mop to this.

[Thorgal]

The US involvement in Syria has been overblown. The US has been against the Assad regime going back to the father and the US had little interest in Syria. There is minimal, if any, business connection and it has no strategic importance for the US. The Assad gov't, going back to the dad, were busy playing nasty little tricks, like making counterfeit US dollars and other efforts at undermining the US and it's economy. There were other things the Assad gov't was involved in as well.

As a result, the US does not and will not back the Assad gov't, in the same way it didn't back the Castro regime. It is much more talk than action.

Assad is pretty much the sole cause of his problems.

Syria had no foreign debt before the civil war who started in 2011. Syria could survive from it exports or its local currency without relying on the IMF. There's no such reason to produce counterfeit US dollars.

Syria was NEVER linked economically with only 2 countries: Israel and the US. In fact you won't find cocal-cola and Mc Donnalds over there.

More than 10 Syrian universities are deployed for its 23 million population so that they don't have to specialise abroad.

We never hear any true voice from the Syrian population who's loyal to Assad. We only hear about the opposition and/or the coalition forces. Assad reelection of 2014 was assured with +87% of the votes in a democratic election.

At the other hand, former French minister of foreign affairs, Laurent Dumas, was asked/proposed back in 2009, in London, to join UK and US to cooperate with a Syrian rebellion...long before the war started in 2011... : this footage is available on YouTube.

Assad declared openly since the beginning of the 2011 conflict that the threat would have been defeated in a few months if there were no foreign funding and direct involvement.

OP also refers to this foreign aid to groups related to ethnic cleansing (Houda), beheadings, cannibalism, etc...

The so called 'moderated' groups have been created to justify all this...

I'm not an Assa fan but let's tell the facts and the figures like they really are.

Edited October 5, 2015 by Thorgal

[craigt3365]

Surprised. Very surprised! Actually baffled.

I said I hope the Swedes and Germans will not tolerate these expropriations for long.

Response from craig 3365 and GeorgesAbitbol is: BS ... the situation in Syria is very complex, Assad is the cause of this problem, Nope, USA is not the only one responsible.

Reminds me a joke from my youth about three drunks trying to find the way home.

So you are saying the situation is not complex? Please, give us your solution to the problem.

Too many outside influences. Brutal dictator. Too many weapons pouring in. Very complex.

[craigt3365]

Interesting analysis of the situation:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-10-04/putin-s-bombs-add-to-reasons-why-syria-s-war-is-here-to-stay

The direct involvement of Russia’s military further complicates an already tangled civil war. With so many groups and foreign actors vying for dominance, even the removal from power of Assad -- the main demand of the rebels supported by the U.S., much of Europe and Gulf states -- is unlikely to enable the piecing together of a country that’s one only in name after more than four years of fighting.

“We’re seeing the battlefield reality largely divorced from the diplomatic show taking place,” said Reva Bhalla, vice president for analysis at Stratfor, an advisory firm based in Austin, Texas. Any agreement would “just mark the beginning of a new phase of instability in Syria,” she said.

[GeorgesAbitbol]

The US involvement in Syria has been overblown. The US has been against the Assad regime going back to the father and the US had little interest in Syria. There is minimal, if any, business connection and it has no strategic importance for the US. The Assad gov't, going back to the dad, were busy playing nasty little tricks, like making counterfeit US dollars and other efforts at undermining the US and it's economy. There were other things the Assad gov't was involved in as well.

As a result, the US does not and will not back the Assad gov't, in the same way it didn't back the Castro regime. It is much more talk than action.

Assad is pretty much the sole cause of his problems.

Oh really?

Nothing about the gas and the pipe line then?

You REALLY think the US wants to free the country? what a joke

[craigt3365]

The US involvement in Syria has been overblown. The US has been against the Assad regime going back to the father and the US had little interest in Syria. There is minimal, if any, business connection and it has no strategic importance for the US. The Assad gov't, going back to the dad, were busy playing nasty little tricks, like making counterfeit US dollars and other efforts at undermining the US and it's economy. There were other things the Assad gov't was involved in as well.

As a result, the US does not and will not back the Assad gov't, in the same way it didn't back the Castro regime. It is much more talk than action.

Assad is pretty much the sole cause of his problems.

Oh really?

Nothing about the gas and the pipe line then?

You REALLY think the US wants to free the country? what a joke

Have you done any research on Assad and his father? Please do some. As far as the US goes, they are almost energy independent. The energy resources in Syria mean nothing.

[thaibeachlovers]

Where is Europe???

Being sensible and staying out of it. There are NO "good" sides. Any side they arm will turn against the west in the future, as they did in Afghanistan.

[craigt3365]

Where is Europe???

Being sensible and staying out of it. There are NO "good" sides. Any side they arm will turn against the west in the future, as they did in Afghanistan.

Is the UK part of Europe?

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/609757/Putin-ISIS-Islamic-State-Syria-Raqqa-troops-soldiers-air-strike-jets-military

Seperately Mr Cameron pledged to "beef up" the SAS and double the number of British drones to combat ISIS militants in an interview ahead of today's Conservative conference.

The Prime Minister said investment in special forces and surveillance was essential to meeting the terrorist threat facing the UK.

He revealed that the UK will buy a fleet of 20 new Protector drones capable of targeting IS extremists in Iraq and Syria.

[Chicog]

Have you done any research on Assad and his father? Please do some. As far as the US goes, they are almost energy independent. The energy resources in Syria mean nothing.

But there are competing pipeline projects to ship Iranian or Qatari gas to European markets.

Not that either of them have ever made much progress.

[Thorgal]

The US involvement in Syria has been overblown. The US has been against the Assad regime going back to the father and the US had little interest in Syria. There is minimal, if any, business connection and it has no strategic importance for the US. The Assad gov't, going back to the dad, were busy playing nasty little tricks, like making counterfeit US dollars and other efforts at undermining the US and it's economy. There were other things the Assad gov't was involved in as well.

As a result, the US does not and will not back the Assad gov't, in the same way it didn't back the Castro regime. It is much more talk than action.

Assad is pretty much the sole cause of his problems.

Oh really?

Nothing about the gas and the pipe line then?

You REALLY think the US wants to free the country? what a joke

Have you done any research on Assad and his father? Please do some. As far as the US goes, they are almost energy independent. The energy resources in Syria mean nothing.

My research stopped promptly in occupied territory in the Golan heights.

Israel started exploring Syrian oil reserves through Genie Oil and Gas company a time ago. Which is unlawful under international laws...

Genie Oil and Gas has some high profile investors and advisors: Media baron Rupert Murdoch, former US Vice President Dick Cheney, American hedge fund manager Michael Steinhardt and British investment banker Jacob Rothschild are all members of the company’s “Strategic Advisory Board.”

There is indeed a link between the forced ending of the remains of the Sykes-Picot agreement and the Wallmart submachine-guns stacked on a shiny Toyota Hilux with cupholders delivered somewhere, somehow in the Middle East...

[Harsh Jones]

U.S. support for Syria rebels illegal: Putin

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/27/us-mideast-crisis-putin-usa-idUSKCN0RR0H820150927

Hey international law excludes the US.

[Harsh Jones]

The US involvement in Syria has been overblown. The US has been against the Assad regime going back to the father and the US had little interest in Syria. There is minimal, if any, business connection and it has no strategic importance for the US. The Assad gov't, going back to the dad, were busy playing nasty little tricks, like making counterfeit US dollars and other efforts at undermining the US and it's economy. There were other things the Assad gov't was involved in as well.

As a result, the US does not and will not back the Assad gov't, in the same way it didn't back the Castro regime. It is much more talk than action.

Assad is pretty much the sole cause of his problems.

Oh really?

Nothing about the gas and the pipe line then?

You REALLY think the US wants to free the country? what a joke

Have you done any research on Assad and his father? Please do some. As far as the US goes, they are almost energy independent. The energy resources in Syria mean nothing.

Basher Assad is a moderate compared to his father. Hes been moving in the right direction.

US energy independence is a farce based on $100 oil. If you used the metrics they used in that study, then a lot of countries would have way more oil then they need. Too bad markets have devalued that oil out of the feasable category eh..

[Publicus]

The US involvement in Syria has been overblown. The US has been against the Assad regime going back to the father and the US had little interest in Syria. There is minimal, if any, business connection and it has no strategic importance for the US. The Assad gov't, going back to the dad, were busy playing nasty little tricks, like making counterfeit US dollars and other efforts at undermining the US and it's economy. There were other things the Assad gov't was involved in as well.

As a result, the US does not and will not back the Assad gov't, in the same way it didn't back the Castro regime. It is much more talk than action.

Assad is pretty much the sole cause of his problems.

Oh really?

Nothing about the gas and the pipe line then?

You REALLY think the US wants to free the country? what a joke

Have you done any research on Assad and his father? Please do some. As far as the US goes, they are almost energy independent. The energy resources in Syria mean nothing.

Basher Assad is a moderate compared to his father. Hes been moving in the right direction.

US energy independence is a farce based on $100 oil. If you used the metrics they used in that study, then a lot of countries would have way more oil then they need. Too bad markets have devalued that oil out of the feasable category eh..

Basher Assad "has been moving in the right direction" has he...

More than 270,000 Syrians dead in the civil war Assad started with its barrel bombs from his air force and millions of Syrians having become desperate refugees, all because in 2011 some young folk started a peaceful demonstration. .

...moving in the right direction eh.

Reading the post one can see if you say go south everyone excepting a few like Putin and Assad would head north and do it pronto.

[craigt3365]

U.S. support for Syria rebels illegal: Putin

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/27/us-mideast-crisis-putin-usa-idUSKCN0RR0H820150927

Hey international law excludes the US.

As it does with Russia? Ukraine, Georgia and now Syria? That sword cuts both ways....

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/14/georgia-accuses-russia-of-violating-international-law-over-south-ossetia

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/116819/international-law-russias-ukraine-intervention

[Publicus]

U.S. support for Syria rebels illegal: Putin

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/27/us-mideast-crisis-putin-usa-idUSKCN0RR0H820150927

Hey international law excludes the US.

If it weren't for the United States over the past 70 years there would not be international law.

There would only be Nazi law or Russian law; China law, Iran law, Brazil law, Rhodesia/Zimbabwe law, Thailand law etc.

International law provides space to lawfully arm rebels (but not to fund them) in a foreign country when the rebel movements are widespread, well established, and when the rebel groups control territory. Syria is three for three.

International law in the context of its application within the United Nations might well oblige a country to arm rebels in another country when the country's legal government is engaged in genocide or crimes against humanity. This is the case in Syria and in respect of United States involvement in Syria, where the Syrian government has killed more than 270,000 Syrians using weapons to include poison gas and barrel bombs, and the Syrian government has created millions of refugees flooding neighboring and other countries to escape the Syrian government's campaign of mass slaughter.

That's four for four in respect of international law....five for five actually....more like six for six and counting.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/06/17/the-syrian-rebels-and-international-law/