• 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

The earlier (couple months ago perhaps) photo I saw did not appear to be US.

Apparently, such weapons are being supplied as a test program for keeping weapons out of extremists' hands.
Do you have a link that specifically addresses the so called " test program" ? Or did you just make that up yourself when jango proved your previous post to be false/lie?
 
Has President Obama forgotten about Osama Bin Laden already?

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
George Santayana


September 17, 2013
The Obama administration waived provisions of a federal law which ban the supply of weapons and money to terrorists. The move is opening doors to supplying Syrian opposition with protection from chemical weapons.

The Arms Export Control Act (AECA) allows the US president to waive provisions in Sections 40 and 40A, which forbid providing munitions, credit and licenses to countries supporting acts of terrorism. But those prohibitions can be waived "if the President determines that the transaction is essential to the national security interests of the United States."

President Barrack Obama ordered such a waiver for supplying chemical weapons-related assistance to "select vetted members" of Syrian opposition forces, the administration announced on Monday.

The Syrian opposition groups are increasingly dominated by radical Islamists, many of them foreign fighters who, the UN says, are involved in numerous crimes committed in Syria. According to estimates of defense consultancy IHS Jane's, more than a half of the forces fighting to topple President Bashar Assad government are jihadists. The US explicitly listed Al-Nusra Front, a powerful Al-Qaeda-linked part of the Syrian opposition, as a terrorist organization.

Still, US politicians believe national intelligence community can ensure that the military assistance goes to the right hands.

"Our intelligence agencies, I think, have a very good handle on who to support and who not to support," Senator Bob Corker said on CBS on Sunday. "And there's going to be mistakes. We understand some people are going to get arms that should not be getting arms. But we still should be doing everything we can to support the free Syrian opposition."

Yes, we can: Obama waives anti-terrorism provisions to arm Syrian rebels ? RT USA
 
Indeed we can.....and we did.


Obama to up support for Syrian rebels: White House.....

c8b6eb4752a8861e829618df40cef85aea8713f5.jpg

A rebel fighter keeps watch over the Karm al-Jabal neighbourhood of Syria's northern city of Aleppo on May 25, 2014

Aboard Air Force One (United States) (AFP) - The White House said Wednesday it would be increasing support for the Syrian opposition, amid reports it is planning to begin training moderate rebels

White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters on Air Force One that Washington would be "increasing support for the moderate opposition."

Officially, US support for Syrian rebels has been limited to non-lethal aid amounting to $287 million, though the CIA reportedly participates in a secret program to train moderate rebels in Jordan.

The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday that Obama was ready to sign off on training missions for selected rebel groups, to counter the rising power of Al-Qaeda-linked extremists.....snip~

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-support-syrian-rebels-white-house-133911176.html
 
We're not going to win any hearts and minds anyway, so who cares?

Seriously? Dropping bombs is not the way to win friends and influence people?
Has anyone told the war hawks in Congress about that?
 
As an earlier poster stated there is no reliable evidence whatsoever that the US has been arming or supporting ISIS. I'll even add that there is great evidence that we have been doing exactly the opposite in an effort to contain them. Paul's remarks are almost certainly wrong.
 
As an earlier poster stated there is no reliable evidence whatsoever that the US has been arming or supporting ISIS. I'll even add that there is great evidence that we have been doing exactly the opposite in an effort to contain them. Paul's remarks are almost certainly wrong.

Mornin' Sherman. :2wave: You are correct that No one in the News says that the US is arming Terrorists.

But now Rebels are a different story. ;)

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=u.s.+tow+missile+syria
 
Mornin' Sherman. :2wave: You are correct that No one in the News says that the US is arming Terrorists.

But now Rebels are a different story. ;)

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=u.s.+tow+missile+syria

Yes we've been arming some of the rebel groups, specifically those that are in confrontation with ISIS and associated Islamist organizations. Which is a direct contradiction of what Paul claimed.
 
Is there any evidence that Paul is right?

I think we've been arming some of the militants in Syria, and it's not inconceivable that ISIS got some of the weapons. (That has a lot to do with Benghazi, IMO).
 
Yes we've been arming some of the rebel groups, specifically those that are in confrontation with ISIS and associated Islamist organizations. Which is a direct contradiction of what Paul claimed.

And nobody in any of the rebel groups gave any of our weapons to ISIS people?
 
Playing politics with these messy foreign double cross, triple cross, entangled matters is just pointless. If you could have a real talk with the CIA director about why things are done here and there you would learn the real truth about our reasons and strategies for accomplishing goals in the middle east. All this is about is Rand Paul jabbing Obama, nothing more. Obama is not a military strategist, he is the PR guy.
 
You are correct that No one in the News says that the US is arming Terrorists.

Not no one, the alternative media certainly are. Just not the mainstream media, because they're useless insiders.
 
And nobody in any of the rebel groups gave any of our weapons to ISIS people?

Entirely plausible but that isn't anywhere close to the same as 'arming ISIS' nor can it be argued that it has had a meaningful impact on their capabilities. We are not arming ISIS, nor are our arms responsible for their success in Syria and Iraq. The Senators remarks are simply untrue.
 
you arm the "rebels" ( and here we'll use the terms for the so called 'moderates' )FSA types, you are by de facto arming up ISIS. The FSA cannot control any territory, cannot hold it's weapon depot
, cannot be reined in Jordan by the CIA for Syrian insertion without the ISIL jihadist getting their weapons almost at will.

It is exceedingly naïve to say " support the moderates" when they cannot hold territory; there are numerous examples of "weapons diversion in Syria" here is from 11 days ago

Iraq - City of Mosul falls to Extremists Flowing in From Syria | SCG News

The tactics employed by the ISIS are so brutal that in February the main branch of Al-Qaeda in Syria disavowed the group entirely. The U.S. government, which has been funding and arming rebels in Syria has attempted to distance itself from both the ISIS and mainline Al-Qaeda fighters in Syria, however the so called "moderate" rebels that Washington is publicly supporting, have admitted that they regularly carry out joint operations with Al-Qaeda, and do not consider the group their enemy.

U.S. officials acknowledge that American weapons and vehicles have been diverted to extremists in both Iraq and Libya, but as of yet they have dodged the obvious questions related to their channeling of arms to insurgents in Syria.

Weapons and funding aside, it is the U.S. government's push to topple Assad that has made ISIS's rise to power possible. The group has thrived in the chaos of the Syrian war, and in its weakened state the Syrian government has been unable to push them out of their strongholds

or this - 'I am not fighting against*al-Qa

'I am not fighting against al-Qa’ida… it’s not our problem', says West’s last hope in Syria

While Maarouf maintains that their military supplies are too few to share, he cites the battle of Yabroud, against the regime, as an example of how his group shared weapons with Jabhat al-Nusra

google 'weapons diversion in Syria"
 
Yes we've been arming some of the rebel groups, specifically those that are in confrontation with ISIS and associated Islamist organizations. Which is a direct contradiction of what Paul claimed.

He never came out and said BO was sending them to Terrorists Directly.....but then we know they were sent and taken from the MB backed Rebels by al Nusra and ISIL.

Which didn't count any cooperative battles. Wherein the MB backed Rebels just gave the weapons to both groups of Terrorists.

Also the info is not all out on the Weapons that we were sending to Syria from Libya. But the Pieces are coming together.
 
He never came out and said BO was sending them to Terrorists Directly.....but then we know they were sent and taken from the MB backed Rebels by al Nusra and ISIL.

Which didn't count any cooperative battles. Wherein the MB backed Rebels just gave the weapons to both groups of Terrorists.

Also the info is not all out on the Weapons that we were sending to Syria from Libya. But the Pieces are coming together.

From the OP's link "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.". That statement is false.
 
From the OP's link "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.". That statement is false.

Yeah, which includes the Sunni backed Rebels with the MB that were trying to remove Assad Sunni Militants, Right?......so like I said he didn't say armed the terrorists directly.

As a matter of Fact he also said this wasn't BO's fault while he talked about what was told by Cheney and Bush and the issue of Iraq.
 
Paul also tried to find out if the CIA annex in Bengazi -which was supposed to be clearing up Libyan weapons after the NATO/US overthrow of Qadaffi was in fact a transit point for weapons to Syria.

I looked many times -because it was a CIA op, it was all covert ops - Paul got nowhere in questioning either. There were a LOT of Libyan weapons showing up in Syria,

How US Ambassador Chris Stevens May Have Been Linked To Jihadist Rebels In Syria - Business Insider

In March 2011 Stevens became the official U.S. liaison to the al-Qaeda-linked Libyan opposition, working directly with Abdelhakim Belhadj of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group — a group that has now disbanded, with some fighters reportedly participating in the attack that took Stevens' life.
In November 2011 The Telegraph reported that Belhadj, acting as head of the Tripoli Military Council, "met with Free Syrian Army [FSA] leaders in Istanbul and on the border with Turkey" in an effort by the new Libyan government to provide money and weapons to the growing insurgency in Syria

That means that Ambassador Stevens had only one person—Belhadj—between him and the Benghazi man who brought heavy weapons to Syria.
 
Not no one, the alternative media certainly are. Just not the mainstream media, because they're useless insiders.

Heya Lachean. :2wave: Well.....you know how they view sources from the other side of any divide. Its all just propaganda.
 
To say that we've been intentionally arming ISIS is completely false. ISIS is in a league of its own in Syria to such an extent that other extremist groups have allied with more moderate ones to fight ISIS. Of course, it's not impossible that ISIS has stolen weapons from the rebels that we do support, but that could happen if we armed Assad, and is not even comparable to direct support.
 
Back
Top Bottom