• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S.-Approved Arms for Libya Rebels Fell Into Jihadis’ Hands

Bronson

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 13, 2012
Messages
3,195
Reaction score
1,192
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
U.S.-Approved Weapons Transfer Ended Up With Libyan Jihadis - NYTimes.com

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration secretly gave its blessing to arms shipments to Libyan rebels from Qatar last year, but American officials later grew alarmed as evidence grew that Qatar was turning some of the weapons over to Islamic militants, according to United States officials and foreign diplomats.

Now evidence has emerged linking the weapons provided by the Qataris during the uprising against Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi to the attack that killed four Americans at the United States diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, in September.

They raided the consulate in Benghazi and killed our Ambassador with weapons provided to them by the Obama Administration

There's more

But in the months before, the Obama administration clearly was worried about the consequences of its hidden hand in helping arm Libyan militants, concerns that have not previously been reported. The weapons and money from Qatar strengthened militant groups in Libya, allowing them to become a destabilizing force since the fall of the Qaddafi government.

Apparently the same tactic has been deployed in Syria, where terrorists groups have been armed with US made surface to air missiles.
 
It was worth getting rid of Gaddafi and it will be worth getting rid of Assad. It's time for democracy and development.
 
We shouldn't be selling or giving arms to any country.Friends can turn into enemies and in this case fall into enemy hands.
 
We shouldn't be selling or giving arms to any country.Friends can turn into enemies and in this case fall into enemy hands.

You really think a few small arms and outdated (for us) surface to air missiles is a threat to the US? No, it's not. Dictators cannot be allowed to bomb people with their own airforce unopposed militarily. They're Islamists? I don't care; they're being bombed by their own airforce - arm them.
 
Last edited:
It was worth getting rid of Gaddafi and it will be worth getting rid of Assad. It's time for democracy and development.

Democracy and development like what they got going on in Egypt? The Arab Spring didn't do anything but take the ME away from ruthless dictators who wanted nothing but to be left alone to run their tyrannical governments the way they wished and hand it over to ruthless jihadis who want to kill all the infidels, around the globe.

As far the people of these countries are concerned, nothing changed, except maybe things got worse.
 
Democracy and development like what they got going on in Egypt? The Arab Spring didn't do anything but take the ME away from ruthless dictators who wanted nothing but to be left alone to run their tyrannical governments the way they wished and hand it over to ruthless jihadis who want to kill all the infidels, around the globe.

There's a bit more to it than that. Democracy takes time. Look how ours started, definately barbaric by today's standards. Societies don't catch up decades of development in months. As long as they're voting and human rights exist legally, progress is in the bank.
 
There's a bit more to it than that. Democracy takes time. Look how ours started, definately barbaric by today's standards. Societies don't catch up decades of development in months.

In the case of the ME, it will enver happen. Egypts first elected president took less than six months to attempt a power grab. The guy that takes his place will do the same thing.
 
In the case of the ME, it will enver happen. Egypts first elected president took less than six months to attempt a power grab. The guy that takes his place will do the same thing.

The people are sufficiently empowered to reject such again and again, that's evidenced. They want their vote and their rights, that's apparent. The women are not gonna lay down and go back to enforced ignorant servitude (politically, if not literally in most case).
 
The people are sufficiently empowered to reject such again and again, that's evidenced. They want their vote and their rights, that's apparent. The women are not gonna lay down and go back to enforced ignorant servitude (politically, if not literally in most case).

I agree and in Egypt's case, they've demonstrated that they're not going to tolerate any bull****. Hopefully the will of the people can outlast the will of the jihadis.
 
You really think a few small arms and outdated (for us) surface to air missiles is a threat to the US? No, it's not.
It doesn't matter if a weapon is allegedly outdated, it can still be a threat to our troops.Weapons can be modified,upgraded,used against our allies,innocent civilians or used for something outside their origingal use.

Dictators cannot be allowed to bomb people with their own airforce unopposed militarily.

Then send our own forces or ask a country who cares to send in a force to bomb their airforce if we are that worried that a dictator is bombing his own people.We shouldn't be supplying other countries or groups with weapons period.
 
I agree and in Egypt's case, they've demonstrated that they're not going to tolerate any bull****. Hopefully the will of the people can outlast the will of the jihadis.

Even if the jihadis win for a while, the people (especially the women) are not going back. The kind of brutality required for such is simply not tolerated, unless the regime has nukes; then, there's little we can do to help.
 
Even if the jihadis win for a while, the people (especially the women) are not going back. The kind of brutality required for such is simply not tolerated, unless the regime has nukes; then, there's little we can do to help.

Well, I'm not as optimistic as you are, but we'll see. I hope you're right.
 
There is nothing more ignorant than the loons that think that in every country the indigenous people yearn for freedom and self-determination.

Certainly with Obama in power, we yearn for those things in the United States.
 
It doesn't matter if a weapon is allegedly outdated, it can still be a threat to our troops.Weapons can be modified,upgraded,used against our allies,innocent civilians or used for something outside their origingal use.

Oh, c'mon. They're gonna MacGyver an AT4 into what... a stealth ICBM?

Then send our own forces or ask a country who cares to send in a force to bomb their airforce if we are that worried that a dictator is bombing his own people.

We wiped out Gaddafi's airforce. I'm not sure why we have not done the same to Assad.

We shouldn't be supplying other countries or groups with weapons period.

This is nonsense. The US sells weapons. That's not gonna change. Don't worry, we're not gonna sell 'em stealth or space shuttles.
 
I'd like to note that presuming the badguys can MacGyver anything negates caring about what they had. They woulda got something somewhere. A shoelace, a thimble, lightbulb and *bam* tactical nuke. Think they couldn't get stuff from other places? Are we gonna pretend that this attack could not have happened were it not for those specific weapons? Nonsense.

Ok, I think we're done. Anyone wanna talk about all the "terrible" stuff that Bush did? I don't see where else this thread can go... CT? We can do the "look at Bush" thing, but I'm not really interested in the "Obama is intentionally supplying terrorists" angle beyond a laugh or two.
 
I'd like to note that presuming the badguys can MacGyver anything negates caring about what they had. They woulda got something somewhere. A shoelace, a thimble, lightbulb and *bam* tactical nuke. Think they couldn't get stuff from other places? Are we gonna pretend that this attack could not have happened were it not for those specific weapons? Nonsense.

Well that certainly removes all culpability. The North Koreans are going to torture and kill millions this year, may as well give them the stuff to do it since they'll get it anyway.
 
Well that certainly removes all culpability. The North Koreans are going to torture and kill millions this year, may as well give them the stuff to do it since they'll get it anyway.

Claiming that the weapons facilitated the attack is just a fallacy to note. That fallacy is not the basis of Obama being justified. You've taken a minor side note, which was intended to head off full-on CT, and pretended it's the basis for Obama's defense.
 
Claiming that the weapons facilitated the attack is just a fallacy to note. That being a fallacy is not the basis of Obama being justified. You've taken a minor side note, to head off full-on CT, and pretended it's the basis for Obama's defense.

They killed innocent people with American arms. Doesn't matter where they were going to get the weapons from, the problem is that they got weapons from us.
 
They killed innocent people with American arms. Doesn't matter where they were going to get the weapons from, the problem is that they got weapons from us.

I disagree. I think the problem is that terrorists are gonna use whatever they can get, black market and otherwise, to kill innocent people. But hey, blaming the tool works too.
 
Oh, c'mon. They're gonna MacGyver an AT4 into what... a stealth ICBM?

They don't need to MacGyver an AT4 into a stealth ICMB. They can use the weapon to take out US troops,fire at buildings Americans are in, take out American vehicles and other uses.

We wiped out Gaddafi's airforce. I'm not sure why we have not done the same to Assad.

Someone else could handle Assad.

This is nonsense. The US sells weapons. That's not gonna change.

It should change.


Don't worry, we're not gonna sell 'em stealth

I bet idiots several years ago were saying the same about the weapons we are currently selling to other countries today.

or space shuttles.

I could care less if they sell them space shuttles.Those are not military weapons or military aircraft.
 
I disagree. I think the problem is that terrorists are gonna use whatever they can get, black market and otherwise, to kill innocent people. But hey, blaming the tool works too.

So just give them weapons and take zero accountability for facilitating this behavior. Wonderful.
 
They don't need to MacGyver an AT4 into a stealth ICMB. They can use the weapon to take out US troops,fire at buildings Americans are in, take out American vehicles and other uses.

And they could use the weapon to overthrow civilian-slaughtering dictators, as intended.

I bet idiots several years ago were saying the same about the weapons we are currently selling to other countries today.

I'm sure they were, but they're not idiots. The gear became antiquated by advancements beyond their knowledge at the time. This is obvious.

I could care less if they sell them space shuttles.Those are not military weapons or military aircraft.

It's tech that leads to much of our military tech, including stuff in rockets and airplanes - to start.
 
Last edited:
So just give them weapons and take zero accountability for facilitating this behavior. Wonderful.

That the weapons facilitated the attack is an obvious fallacy, such weapons are all over the country and from many places; it just so happens that some are American made. That Obama gave weapons to the terrorists is another fallacy. Did you read the OP?
 
Last edited:
That the weapons facilitated the attack is an obvious fallacy, such weapons are all over the country and from many places; it just so happens that these were American made. That Obama gave weapons to the terrorists is another fallacy. Did you read the OP?

I don't care what the op said. I'm talking about what you said, which is that it doesn't matter that we're giving them weapons, because they were going to get weapons from somewhere.
 
Back
Top Bottom