• 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!

Paul: US has been arming ISIS in Syria

24107

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
2,809
Reaction score
824
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Paul: US has been arming ISIS in Syria | TheHill
Do you think this will continue?
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said Sunday that the Sunni militants taking over Iraq have quickly gained power because the United States has armed their group in Syria. *

“I think we have to understand first how we got here,” he said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “We have been arming [the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria] ISIS in Syria.”



Read more: http://thehill.com/policy/internati...g-isis-in-syria-sen-paul-claims#ixzz35P8aB73o
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook
 
Is there any evidence that Paul is right?

I don't know if there is direct evidence but indirectly, what happens when the people we're arming die? Where do their U.S. supplied weapons go?
 
PressTV - US arming Syria militants with advanced weapons: Report

I am of course assuming that a weapon that goes to ANY Syrian militant is probably going to ISIS.
Which may or may not be the case.
Why we would arm anyone in Syria is a mystery to me. I really don't see any good guys over there, and if the arms we supply are, indeed going to ISIS that is a total failure of foreign policy.

But, saying that we are arming ISIS does seem to me to be jumping to conclusions at this point.
 
We've been arming the Middle East for years. They're our best customers. It's what the Cold War was about.





Did you people not know this?
 

Paul is probably right. Knowing some of those we armed and helped for either short term gain or just to spit an known enemy at the time, arming ISIS probably happened and maybe is continuing. We wanted Assad gone, most likely this arming was not to the ISIS directly, but indirectly.
 
weapons diversion is the "arming". the CIA was arming thru Jordan, now there are training and arming both


The U.S. is providing more arms and training to the moderate rebels in Syria, under a growing secret program run by the CIA in Jordan. Sources tell NPR that secret program could be supplemented by a more public effort in the coming months involving American military trainers.

The change in strategy comes as the White House sees Syrian leader Bashar Assad growing in strength, and continuing to strike rebel strongholds
April 23, 2014

CIA Is Quietly Ramping Up Aid To Syrian Rebels, Sources Say : Parallels : NPR

I've been screaming about this for years, Assad isn't the problem in Syria, as we finally all see. The FSA is incapable of holding on to their depots, training and arming up FSA types in Jordan is just stupid
 
Paul is probably right. Knowing some of those we armed and helped for either short term gain or just to spit an known enemy at the time, arming ISIS probably happened and maybe is continuing. We wanted Assad gone, most likely this arming was not to the ISIS directly, but indirectly.

Its not like this hasn't happened in the past before... I mean Regan and Bush sr armed Al Quaeda so I mean... there is plenty of precedent of presidents doing this. We armed Al Quaeda to fight russia.... worked out bad for us... and then we repeat the mistake and arm these syrian militants.... also bad.
 
TOW missiles/training..it's an incredibly stupid thing to do

SA-7's from Libya ( MNAPADS) another glorious Obama screw up
 
Which may or may not be the case.
Why we would arm anyone in Syria is a mystery to me. I really don't see any good guys over there, and if the arms we supply are, indeed going to ISIS that is a total failure of foreign policy.

But, saying that we are arming ISIS does seem to me to be jumping to conclusions at this point.

Maybe not intended but probably inevitable. Take this theoretical or again perhaps not example, who knows? We have a stockpile of weapons from many countries around the world, weapons not directly traceable to the U.S. In this case we use a middle man we can trust. How about fellow NATO member Turkey, who also has a beef with Assad and wants to help the rebels. We give Turkey the weapons but state none to go to any AQ rebels, just the good rebels. Turkey of course says okay as all they want is the weapons. Turkey takes these weapons and distributes them as they see fit, all along assuring the U.S. none of the weapons are going to any rebel group that associates themselves with AQ.

Turkey gives them to any rebel group they want to. I would assume here Turkey is giving them to the strongest rebel groups which have the best chance of overthrowing Assad. Turkey doesn't who the Rebels are associated with. So ISIS and other terrorist groups could indeed be receiving arms from the U.S., abet indirectly.

The above is just an example of how we do things, are we doing it this way, who knows?
 
Could the Republican party be any more schizophrenic when it comes to foreign policy?

 
Maybe not intended but probably inevitable. Take this theoretical or again perhaps not example, who knows? We have a stockpile of weapons from many countries around the world, weapons not directly traceable to the U.S. In this case we use a middle man we can trust. How about fellow NATO member Turkey, who also has a beef with Assad and wants to help the rebels. We give Turkey the weapons but state none to go to any AQ rebels, just the good rebels. Turkey of course says okay as all they want is the weapons. Turkey takes these weapons and distributes them as they see fit, all along assuring the U.S. none of the weapons are going to any rebel group that associates themselves with AQ.

Turkey gives them to any rebel group they want to. I would assume here Turkey is giving them to the strongest rebel groups which have the best chance of overthrowing Assad. Turkey doesn't who the Rebels are associated with. So ISIS and other terrorist groups could indeed be receiving arms from the U.S., abet indirectly.

The above is just an example of how we do things, are we doing it this way, who knows?

That scenario is at least plausible.
 
there is more then enough stupidity on Syria; McCain's fantasy posing with General Idris, of the FSA, Obama's "red line" to degrade Assad -
which thankfully Kerry managed to punt to the Russians, when they said "sure we'll get rid of the chem weapons." ( which are sorta going..slowly.. away).

al_Nusra Front allied with ISIL until even they realized just how bad they are ( heart eating, beheadings, crucifixions)..we still have this meme of a "transition" away from Assad.

Still arming up so called "moderates", even when moderates cannot hold their weapons

Islamists seize Free Syrian Army arms depots: activists | News , Middle East | THE DAILY STAR

cut it out. support an end to the war, support Assad - even if the Russians do also
 
Its not like this hasn't happened in the past before... I mean Regan and Bush sr armed Al Quaeda so I mean... there is plenty of precedent of presidents doing this. We armed Al Quaeda to fight russia.... worked out bad for us... and then we repeat the mistake and arm these syrian militants.... also bad.

I think with Reagan it really wasn't AQ, it was all 18 tribes of Afghanistan which included the Taliban. I am not sure if AQ as an organization existed, if it did it was small. Ollie North warned congress about UBL when he was testifying before congress. No one had heard of UBL, so everyone just laughed UBL off at the time. But to get back to the arming of one organization I really hated.

If you remember in April of 1975 Phnom Penh fell and Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge took over. We were on the side of Lon Nol fighting the Khmer Rouge at this time. During the next 3 years Pol Pot and his KR either killed or caused the deaths of 3 million Cambodians, this out of a country that only had 7 Million people before the killing fields started. In 1978 the North Vietnamese invaded, I should say just the Vietnamese since it was one country then and put a stop to the Killing Fields, Pol Pot and his KR. The Vietnamese drove the KR out into the jungle and set up a puppet government in Phnom Penh.

Instead of thanking the Vietnamese as we should, since we still hated the Vietnamese we begin to arm Pol Pot and his KR to include some training of the KR in Thailand. We talked the Thai's into giving the KR sanctuaries whenever the Vietnamese got too close to them. Can you imagine that, helping Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge who had just exterminated 3 million of their own people. Jimmy Carter started this and Reagan continued it keeping the man in charge of arming the KR during Carter in the same job in his administration to oversee Reagan's arming of the KR.

To me the Vietnamese were heroes for stopping the killing fields. yet the U.S. was now in business of arming, training and giving sactuary to a group that had just killed or cause the death of 3 million people.

If we can do this, we sure can arm ISIS.
 
Last edited:
there is more then enough stupidity on Syria; McCain's fantasy posing with General Idris, of the FSA, Obama's "red line" to degrade Assad -which thankfully Kerry managed to punt to the Russians,
when they said "sure we'll get rid of the chem weapons." ( which are sorta going).

al_Nusra Front allied with ISIL until even they realized just how bad they are ( heart eating, beheadings, crucifixions)..we still have this meme of a "transition" away from Assad.
Still arming up so called "moderates", even when moderates cannot hold their weapons

Islamists seize Free Syrian Army arms depots: activists | News , Middle East | THE DAILY STAR

cut it out. support an end to the war, support Assad -even if the Russians do also

So... since they are going to kill themselves anyways.... Can we Nuke the whole country of Syria Plzzzzz??? :roll:
 
That scenario is at least plausible.

I'm not saying that is the way it was done or even if we are doing something akin to it. Just that we have done things this way in the past, probably more times than one would want to think.
 
So... since they are going to kill themselves anyways.... Can we Nuke the whole country of Syria Plzzzzz??? :roll:

it's not just Syria ( trying to give a sane answer to an insane idea) it's Lebanon, Turkey, our friends in Jordan, the whole of the Levant that is in danger whether from 9,000,000 Syrian refuges,
or ISIL itself
 
I'm not saying that is the way it was done or even if we are doing something akin to it. Just that we have done things this way in the past, probably more times than one would want to think.

Yes, we have, and much more than we should have.
 
Back
Top Bottom