• 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

Jack Hays said:
There's nothing for which to apologize.
Click to expand...

I don't want my government to try to overthrow other nations democratically elected leaders, especially by arming terrorist

YMMV
 
Montecresto said:
Dear lord, I'm never surprised the extent that apologists for US policy go to justify wrong doing
Click to expand...

:lol: nope. I'm happy to point out where US foreign policy has failed. I just choose to do so in an informed manner, where I actually know what I am talking about.

Decades of failed policy in the ME as well as support for militant Islamists. A region in total flames and you think I'm the desperate one. Yeah cp, just another patronising conservative hawk.
Click to expand...

Dude you are trying to pull anything you can out of thin air to make Paul not an idiot, a fool, or a liar. You are the one who chose to make yourself sound desperate, not me.

As for patronising? :shrug: maybe - I give off that tone sometimes. But both Paul and you clearly know very little about ISIL, and you refused to accept that, but continued to insist on a claim unconnected to reality.
 
ARealConservative said:
you are paid to study this sort of thing? That makes you a sock puppet in my mind.
Click to expand...

That's nice. Do you consider all members of the military to be sock puppets? Or just the ones who are have jobs in which they are required to think?
 
cpwill said:
That's nice. Do you consider all members of the military to be sock puppets? Or just the ones who are have jobs in which they are required to think?
Click to expand...

I would hope all jobs require to think. which ones don't exactly?
 
Montecresto said:
The relationships between many of the militant groups from Libya into Syria, Iraq, etc., are not completely known or understood.
Click to expand...

It's worth noting as well that while the word "completely" sets up an impossible strawman, we actually have a pretty good idea about the major groups in those three countries. In Libya, for example, AAS (they are currently, of course, busy with General Haftar) is perhaps the most active, and they fall under AQIM, who fall under AQSL, meaning that they back the ANF, not ISIL, who fights with ANF as well as the FSA, and generally proves as willing to attack fellow rebels as they are the Syrian regime (infighting among the rebels is one of the regimes' greatest assets in this fight).

ISIL, on the other hand, has been led by Abubakr al-Baghdadi since the death of Abu Omar al-Baghdadi, who picked up leadership of ISIL after the death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. At each point they were lead by Islamists who were affiliated with the AQ brand - although Zarqawi was home grown and Abubakr al-Baghdadi later rejected Zawahiri's Emirship. At no point has this organization ever been led by Baathists or those who seek representative government, such as the two men your source tried to claim were ISIL leadership, as they consider both to be apostate and anathema.
 
Last edited:
cpwill said:
:D PFC's.

But I can't help but notice you didn't answer the question. :)
Click to expand...

I found it either rhetorical or idiotic...not sure which.

I find your presence in these threads tiring and unconvincing.
 
ARealConservative said:
I found it either rhetorical or idiotic...not sure which.

I find your presence in these threads tiring and unconvincing.
Click to expand...

:roll: says the guy who started this bit by calling someone a sock-puppet.

Let me know when you are willing to answer my question, or defend the abusive and foolish stance with which you began.
 
cpwill said:
:roll: says the guy who started this bit by calling someone a sock-puppet.

Let me know when you are willing to answer my question, or defend the abusive and foolish stance with which you began.
Click to expand...

this thread isn't about you, it's about how we aided allies of terrorists (and have done so for decades)
 
ARealConservative said:
this thread isn't about you, it's about how we aided allies of terrorists (and have done so for decades)
Click to expand...

Actually no it's not. It's about Rand Paul's foolish claim that we have been arming ISIL in Syria. Look, it's in the title and everything :).
 
cpwill said:
Actually no it's not. It's about Rand Paul's foolish claim that we have been arming ISIL in Syria. Look, it's in the title and everything :).
Click to expand...

ISIL is not in the title. Look, your clown show is pathetic.

As was already stated to your minions:

"ISIS emboldened after US armed its allies in Syria"

That is the claim of substance you have given zero evidence of being false. All the crap about if that ally in Syria is ISIS, or some other group is just obfuscation by apologists that don't want to focus on how we arm terrorists and terrorist sympathizers and have done so for decades.
 
Jack Hays said:
Tsk tsk. This forum has rules against personal insults. Since I'm a generous man I'll overlook this one.:peace
Click to expand...

since you are merely trolling, I would be ok with you reporting me.

your paid analyst/lobbyist failed to offer any evidence, and apparently he is who you deferred to. so what are you still doing here?
 
ARealConservative said:
since you are merely trolling, I would be ok with you reporting me.

your paid analyst/lobbyist failed to offer any evidence, and apparently he is who you deferred to. so what are you still doing here?
Click to expand...

Thoughtless know-nothingism should be challenged. I'm doing my duty.:peace
 
ARealConservative said:
you have provided nothing but evidence of your ignorance.
Click to expand...

What is without evidence is the allegation that the US has been arming ISIS. Those who would make that charge bear the burden of proof. For those who know the allegation is hogwash, life is simple. It is a logical principle that it is impossible to prove a negative. There is no evidence for us to provide because there is no substance to the claim. It is a product of Paul's fevered imagination or his calculated ambition.:peace
 
Jack Hays said:
What is without evidence is the allegation that the US has been arming ISIS. Those who would make that charge bear the burden of proof. For those who know the allegation is hogwash, life is simple. It is a logical principle that it is impossible to prove a negative. There is no evidence for us to provide because there is no substance to the claim. It is a product of Paul's fevered imagination or his calculated ambition.:peace
Click to expand...

The issue of substance you refuse to address is that arming rebels in Syria eventually aided terrorists in Iraq.

Fortunately, people are sick of the crap you guys have been doing, and then lying about for decades. It’s coming to an end. I suggest you find your allies back in the liberal wing of the country that still agree with massive government overreach.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom