• 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!

US Backing for 'Moderate' Syrian Rebels: Long Reported, Continually Forgotten

Should we be arming Islamic rebels?.


  • Total voters
    10
  • Poll closed .

DaveFagan

Iconoclast
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 20, 2011
Messages
10,090
Reaction score
5,056
Location
wny
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
* US Backing for 'Moderate' Syrian Rebels: Long Reported, Continually Forgotten :* Information Clearing House - ICH

"

US Backing for 'Moderate' Syrian Rebels: Long Reported, Continually Forgotten

By Adam Johnson

February 25, 2015 "ICH" - "Fair" - That the US is arming and training Syrian rebels has been well-documented for over two years, yet Western media have historically suffered from a strange collective amnesia when reporting this fact. As Ian Sinclair noted last September in the Huffington Post (9/23/14):


New York Times (5/4/13): "President [Obama] seems to be moving closer to providing lethal assistance to the Syrian rebels, even though he rejected such a policy just months ago."

Guardian (5/8/13): "The US, which has outlawed al-Nusra as a terrorist group, has hesitated to arm the FSA [Free Syrian Army]."…
New York Times (9/9/14): "Mr Obama has resisted military engagement in Syria for more than three years, out of fear early on that arming the rebels who oppose Mr. Assad would fail to alter the balance in the civil war."
BBC Today Programme (9/11/14), presenter Mishal Husein to US ambassador: "If you [the US] had helped the moderate Syrian opposition, the Free Syrian Army, three years ago, even two years ago, we might well not be in the position that we are now. President Obama's reluctance to intervene and to take action on Syria has contributed to what we are seeing now."
New York Times (5/4/13): "President [Obama] seems to be moving closer to providing lethal assistance to the Syrian rebels, even though he rejected such a policy just months ago."

Guardian (5/8/13): "The US, which has outlawed al-Nusra as a terrorist group, has hesitated to arm the FSA [Free Syrian Army]."…
New York Times (9/9/14): "Mr Obama has resisted military engagement in Syria for more than three years, out of fear early on that arming the rebels who oppose Mr. Assad would fail to alter the balance in the civil war."
BBC Today Programme (9/11/14), presenter Mishal Husein to US ambassador: "If you [the US] had helped the moderate Syrian opposition, the Free Syrian Army, three years ago, even two years ago, we might well not be in the position that we are now. President Obama's reluctance to intervene and to take action on Syria has contributed to what we are seeing now."

Should we be arming Islamic rebels?.
We've been doing this since 2012.

 
We should stick to arming the drug cartels and let the Iranians and Russians arm the ME "moderates". ;)
 
It's not forgotten by anyone, to be honest. I suppose this ties into more of your "theories."

That said, I wish we hadn't inserted ourselves into that Syrian mess.
 
In mid-2012, the most influential newspaper in the world reported the US was helping to arm the rebels–a fact confirmed by subsequent stories in the New York Times itself, as well as numerous reports in other mainstream news outlets around the world
Contrast this publicly available, easily accessed information with these summaries from the mainstream media of the ongoing US role in Syria…:

"I didn't have enough text space for this lead in to the article.(Dave)"
 
It's not forgotten by anyone, to be honest. I suppose this ties into more of your "theories."

That said, I wish we hadn't inserted ourselves into that Syrian mess.

Nothing like that. The article quotes newspaper headlines by reputable publications that state that the USA is not arming the rebels and they are the same papers that originally published the story that we are and have been arming those rebels. Now why would that be?
 
Nothing like that. The article quotes newspaper headlines by reputable publications that state that the USA is not arming the rebels and they are the same papers that originally published the story that we are and have been arming those rebels. Now why would that be?

And there's plenty that say the opposite, so where does that leave us?

It's funny, it's almost as if the mainstream media are doing the tango around the facts to keep the informed public on the edge of their seats to get more hits on the internet, sell more papers, and sell more magazines.

It's not a bad thing to bring up though on your part.
 
Nothing like that. The article quotes newspaper headlines by reputable publications that state that the USA is not arming the rebels and they are the same papers that originally published the story that we are and have been arming those rebels. Now why would that be?


Mornin DF. :2wave: Because we have been arming them.....and it was reported that 3 times BO sent aid.


Online videos show Syrian rebels using what appear to be U.S. anti-tank rockets, weapons experts say, the first significant American-built armaments in the country's civil war. None of that equipment, however, is seen as enough to turn the tide of battle in a now broadly stalemated war, with Assad dominant in Syria's central cities and along the Mediterranean coast and the rebels in the interior north and east. It was not possible to independently verify the authenticity of the videos or the supplier of the BGM-71 TOW anti-tank rockets shown in the videos. Some analysts suggested they might have been provided by another state such as Saudi Arabia, a U.S. ally, probably with Washington's acquiescence.

U.S. officials declined to discuss the rockets, which appeared in Syria around the same time Reuters reported that Washington had decided to proceed with plans to increase aid, including delivery of lower-level weaponry.

National Security Council spokeswoman Bernadette Meehan said the Obama administration was giving support she did not define. "The United States is committed to building the capacity of the moderate opposition, including through the provision of assistance to vetted members of the moderate armed opposition," she said in response to a query over the rocket videos.....snip~

Rebel videos show first U.S.-made rockets in Syria
 
And there's plenty that say the opposite, so where does that leave us?

It's funny, it's almost as if the mainstream media are doing the tango around the facts to keep the informed public on the edge of their seats to get more hits on the internet, sell more papers, and sell more magazines.

It's not a bad thing to bring up though on your part.

Is it because it can't be blamed on Bush that it must be denied at all cost?
 
We should stick to arming the drug cartels and let the Iranians and Russians arm the ME "moderates". ;)

Mornin Ttwtt. :2wave: Well it didn't help with ISIS and at first Al Nusra.....just gangsterin the arms and weapons from the Syrian Rebel/Terrorists. We even had material up on Rebel commanders that wanted to bring sharia Law to Syria. That al nusra was the Rebels toughest fighting force. So they just told whoever to give them whatever. Which the Rebels did.

Even had Syrian Rebels admit they were getting the Weapons from Libya. Especially the man-pads.
 
Mornin Ttwtt. :2wave: Well it didn't help with ISIS and at first Al Nusra.....just gangsterin the arms and weapons from the Syrian Rebel/Terrorists. We even had material up on Rebel commanders that wanted to bring sharia Law to Syria. That al nusra was the Rebels toughest fighting force. So they just told whoever to give them whatever. Which the Rebels did.

Even had Syrian Rebels admit they were getting the Weapons from Libya. Especially the man-pads.

Many of the weapons and militants have joined up with IS. I presume it must be part of the plan, because our gov't has all the money and brainy people in the World working to solve/cause these problems for some geopolitical objective. The gist of the post is that in 2012 the Media was admitting we were arming Islamic Militants and then for several years after tries to deny/obfuscate that fact. Fer krissakes, these are news reporters, not amateurs. When you are being fed lies, they are part of an agenda. The fact that the lies come from the MSM should make one pause. Can the MSM be trusted on anything? I think not.
 
Many of the weapons and militants have joined up with IS. I presume it must be part of the plan, because our gov't has all the money and brainy people in the World working to solve/cause these problems for some geopolitical objective. The gist of the post is that in 2012 the Media was admitting we were arming Islamic Militants and then for several years after tries to deny/obfuscate that fact. Fer krissakes, these are news reporters, not amateurs. When you are being fed lies, they are part of an agenda. The fact that the lies come from the MSM should make one pause. Can the MSM be trusted on anything? I think not.


I know as I was tearing them for the terminology they were using. Islamic Militant or the common criminal, gunmen. Reporting even AQ or Ansar al Sharia as Militants and or gunmen. It was ridiculous. But at least they can't go back and remove Islamic Militants from all their articles.
 
Watcha think DF. :confused: Here is when Team BO recognized the Syrian Opposition as a foreign mission. Oh, and BO Peep threw them an extra 27mil. ;)




U.S. recognizes Syria opposition offices as 'foreign mission'.....


The United States said on Monday it would recognize the main opposition Syrian National Coalition offices as a diplomatic foreign mission and announced plans for a $27 million increase in non-lethal assistance to rebels fighting to oust President Bashar al-Assad. The announcement came at the start of a visit to Washington by a Syrian opposition delegation led by Ahmad Jarba, president of the coalition, also known as the Syrian Opposition Coalition. He is set to meet U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry on Thursday.

Syrian government forces have made gains on the battlefield and Damascus has announced a presidential election for June 3, expected to be won by Assad. Washington has said the elections are not credible and U.S. officials have denounced them as "phony." State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said the representative offices of the coalition would now be considered a "foreign mission" under U.S. law.

She said it was another move aimed at formalizing the relationship between Washington and the coalition, which until now has been represented by liaison offices in Washington and New York.....snip~

U.S. recognizes Syria opposition offices as 'foreign mission'


Marie Harf......huh? :lol:
 
President Obama extends national emergency with respect to the actions of Syria declared in Executive Order 13338.....
On May 7, 2014 the SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House of Representatives the following message from the President of the United States; which was read and, together with the accompanying papers, referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs and ordered to be printed:

To The Congress of the United States:

Section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act, 50 U.S.C. 1622(d), provides for the automatic termination of a national emergency, unless, within 90 days prior to the anniversary date of its declaration, the President publishes in the Federal Register and transmits to the Congress a notice stating that the emergency is to continue in effect beyond the anniversary date. In accordance with this provision, I have sent to the Federal Register for publication the enclosed notice stating that the national emergency with respect to the actions of the Government of Syria declared in Executive Order 13338 of May 11, 2004–as modified in scope and relied upon for additional steps taken in Executive Order 13399 of April 25, 2006, Executive Order 13460 of February 13, 2008, Executive Order 13572 of April 29, 2011, Executive Order 13573 of May 18, 2011, Executive Order 13582 of August 17, 2011, Executive Order 13606 of April 22, 2012, and Executive Order 13608 of May 1, 2012–is to continue in effect beyond May 11, 2014.....snip~

President Obama extends national emergency with respect to the actions of Syria declared in Executive Order 13338 | News, US | GroundReport.com – Latest World News & Opinions


Found it. ;)
 
President Obama extends national emergency with respect to the actions of Syria declared in Executive Order 13338.....
On May 7, 2014 the SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House of Representatives the following message from the President of the United States; which was read and, together with the accompanying papers, referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs and ordered to be printed:

To The Congress of the United States:

Section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act, 50 U.S.C. 1622(d), provides for the automatic termination of a national emergency, unless, within 90 days prior to the anniversary date of its declaration, the President publishes in the Federal Register and transmits to the Congress a notice stating that the emergency is to continue in effect beyond the anniversary date. In accordance with this provision, I have sent to the Federal Register for publication the enclosed notice stating that the national emergency with respect to the actions of the Government of Syria declared in Executive Order 13338 of May 11, 2004–as modified in scope and relied upon for additional steps taken in Executive Order 13399 of April 25, 2006, Executive Order 13460 of February 13, 2008, Executive Order 13572 of April 29, 2011, Executive Order 13573 of May 18, 2011, Executive Order 13582 of August 17, 2011, Executive Order 13606 of April 22, 2012, and Executive Order 13608 of May 1, 2012–is to continue in effect beyond May 11, 2014.....snip~

President Obama extends national emergency with respect to the actions of Syria declared in Executive Order 13338 | News, US | GroundReport.com – Latest World News & Opinions


Found it. ;)

Of course this is 2 1/2 years since we started arming and funding the Islamic rebels. All I can do is keep repeating "perception management and the CIA" until people wake up and realize they are being bamboozled on a daily basis. The truth was accidently slipped through in 2012 and for the next few years contradictory articles appear to adjust the perception. That would be "perception management." It is not accidental.
 
Of course this is 2 1/2 years since we started arming and funding the Islamic rebels. All I can do is keep repeating "perception management and the CIA" until people wake up and realize they are being bamboozled on a daily basis. The truth was accidently slipped through in 2012 and for the next few years contradictory articles appear to adjust the perception. That would be "perception management." It is not accidental.

No its not accidental.....but who do you think it the cause for the change in terminology? Wasn't the old school reporters and journalists. So Who does that leave? Who is all about changing terminology and going all PC like?
 
No its not accidental.....but who do you think it the cause for the change in terminology? Wasn't the old school reporters and journalists. So Who does that leave? Who is all about changing terminology and going all PC like?

It means that some faction of the government has gained control of the "Editorial review" policy in the major media (MSM). In 1977 the Church Committee found 400 CIA assets and agents operating in USA media. That was the tip of the iceberg. It will have expanded exponentially since then because of bigger budgets and a more organized method. A lot of the groundwork was laid after 9-11 through the Patriot Act and has grown like a cancer. The bullcrap, misinformation, lies, stenographers posing as news reporters(Judith Miller, Brown, etal), built the system that substitutes for news today. Damn shame.
 
It means that some faction of the government has gained control of the "Editorial review" policy in the major media (MSM). In 1977 the Church Committee found 400 CIA assets and agents operating in USA media. That was the tip of the iceberg. It will have expanded exponentially since then because of bigger budgets and a more organized method. A lot of the groundwork was laid after 9-11 through the Patriot Act and has grown like a cancer. The bullcrap, misinformation, lies, stenographers posing as news reporters(Judith Miller, Brown, etal), built the system that substitutes for news today. Damn shame.



Well, BO and his Team want to still arm the Rebels.....so to does the Neo Cons and Johnny Quest McCain. Yet they haven't heard our Military and Intel people. Plus others report that the Syrian Rebels are finished.

Most of them have joined ISIS. Most of them wanted Shariah Law anyways.

BO sent them 600 Mil twice. Its a waste of money and our time.

This here.....is all the Saud and the Sunnis play. They are the ones that want the Shia Assad gone. They wanted us to do their dirty work for them. Since they are incapable of taking out Assad by themselves. Despite the Sunni outnumbering them 100 to one.

The Saud thought they would get the same play they did with getting rid of Gadhafi and was hoping Libya would be handed to the Sunni. Which would be Sunni Berbers that are willing to bow and kiss the Sauds ass. As all others are against the Saud or any Arabs ruling over them.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/middle-east/187402-concerning-syria-6.html
 
Last edited:
Oh btw.....should we give weapons to the Syrian Rebels/Terrorists and train them. Hell No!!!!!



Tragic Setbacks for U.S. Allies in Iraq and Syria.....


Western Iraq saw more brutal bloodshed this weekend after the Islamic State massacred 322 people of the Albu Nimr tribe, a Sunni group, including women and children. The Iraqi government confirmed the attack in the Anbar region, which began on Saturday and continued into Sunday, and was described as "systematic killings." Beyond the lives lost, the success of these "systematic killings" will have a long-term impact on the struggle between ISIS and the Iraqi government. "The fall of the village dampened the Shi'ite-led national government's hopes the Sunni tribesmen of Anbar—who once helped U.S. Marines defeat al Qaeda—would become a formidable force again and help the army take on Iraq's new, far more effective enemy," noted Reuters's Michael Georgy.

In Syria, the United States faced another setback in its battle against terrorist groups, when weapons distributed to anti-government rebels ended up in the hands of an al-Qaeda splinter group, Jabhat al-Nusra. The weapons provided by the United States included GRAD rockets and TOW anti-tank missiles. It is unclear if the moderate rebels who had been trained by the United States surrendered or defected to the terrorist group. The Independent reported that a U.S.-backed rebel group, Harakat Hazm, surrendered on Saturday night "without firing a shot" after al-Nusra attacked the villages it controlled. Some soldiers apparently defected, and the Syrian Revolutionary Front, another group receiving U.S. support, was driven from its strongholds.....snip~

Tragic Setbacks for U.S. Allies in Iraq and Syria
 
Is it because it can't be blamed on Bush that it must be denied at all cost?

Are you insinuating the mainstream press means to suppress the failures of the Obama administration's arming of "moderate" Syrian rebels because it can't be deflected as a product of the Bush administration, that there is a media conspiracy afoot against Bush and the general Republican base?

This sounds like something I'd hear from a conservative political "analyst" raving on some right wing haven of a news website.

It's very colorful, I'll give you that.
 
Are you insinuating the mainstream press means to suppress the failures of the Obama administration's arming of "moderate" Syrian rebels because it can't be deflected as a product of the Bush administration, that there is a media conspiracy afoot against Bush and the general Republican base?

This sounds like something I'd hear from a conservative political "analyst" raving on some right wing haven of a news website.

It's very colorful, I'll give you that.

I mean to say that mainstream press in America is business, and has been allowed to extend its tentacles into all manor of things, including the defense industry, and as such does poorly at adequately covering events during both democratic and republican administrations, that wouldn't be in their economic interests! This needs to change. Something Hillary Clinton was right about when she testified before congress that US MSM is fluff, lacking substance, and was no longer of real value or informative like international news media. That we need more information, but unfortunately the US MSM was loosing the information war against international media.
 
In early 2012 the US missed a huge opportunity to support genuinely moderate (and largely secular) opponents of the Asad regime. Our failure to do so created the opportunity for extremists to supplant them as the regime's principal opponents.
 
In early 2012 the US missed a huge opportunity to support genuinely moderate (and largely secular) opponents of the Asad regime. Our failure to do so created the opportunity for extremists to supplant them as the regime's principal opponents.

I think that was over-exaggerated JH. We had up all their groups. Many were espousing for Shariah Law.
 
* US Backing for 'Moderate' Syrian Rebels: Long Reported, Continually Forgotten :* Information Clearing House - ICH

"

US Backing for 'Moderate' Syrian Rebels: Long Reported, Continually Forgotten

By Adam Johnson

February 25, 2015 "ICH" - "Fair" - That the US is arming and training Syrian rebels has been well-documented for over two years, yet Western media have historically suffered from a strange collective amnesia when reporting this fact. As Ian Sinclair noted last September in the Huffington Post (9/23/14):


New York Times (5/4/13): "President [Obama] seems to be moving closer to providing lethal assistance to the Syrian rebels, even though he rejected such a policy just months ago."

Guardian (5/8/13): "The US, which has outlawed al-Nusra as a terrorist group, has hesitated to arm the FSA [Free Syrian Army]."…
New York Times (9/9/14): "Mr Obama has resisted military engagement in Syria for more than three years, out of fear early on that arming the rebels who oppose Mr. Assad would fail to alter the balance in the civil war."
BBC Today Programme (9/11/14), presenter Mishal Husein to US ambassador: "If you [the US] had helped the moderate Syrian opposition, the Free Syrian Army, three years ago, even two years ago, we might well not be in the position that we are now. President Obama's reluctance to intervene and to take action on Syria has contributed to what we are seeing now."
New York Times (5/4/13): "President [Obama] seems to be moving closer to providing lethal assistance to the Syrian rebels, even though he rejected such a policy just months ago."

Guardian (5/8/13): "The US, which has outlawed al-Nusra as a terrorist group, has hesitated to arm the FSA [Free Syrian Army]."…
New York Times (9/9/14): "Mr Obama has resisted military engagement in Syria for more than three years, out of fear early on that arming the rebels who oppose Mr. Assad would fail to alter the balance in the civil war."
BBC Today Programme (9/11/14), presenter Mishal Husein to US ambassador: "If you [the US] had helped the moderate Syrian opposition, the Free Syrian Army, three years ago, even two years ago, we might well not be in the position that we are now. President Obama's reluctance to intervene and to take action on Syria has contributed to what we are seeing now."

Should we be arming Islamic rebels?.
We've been doing this since 2012.

Predictably these "moderates" turned out to be affiliated with Al-Qaeda. So basically should we be arming Al-Qaeda?
 
In early 2012 the US missed a huge opportunity to support genuinely moderate (and largely secular) opponents of the Asad regime. Our failure to do so created the opportunity for extremists to supplant them as the regime's principal opponents.

In early 2012 the US missed a huge opportunity to support the Assad regime. Our failure to do so created the opportunity for extremists to grow in strength and attack the legitimate governing body of Syria. A legitimate body that protects and defends people regardless of faith I might add.
 
Predictably these "moderates" turned out to be affiliated with Al-Qaeda. So basically should we be arming Al-Qaeda?

Precisely my point. If you don't have terrorists, you don't have a War on Terror and the associated profit stream. Ergo, it is prudent marketing to arm terrorists wherever you can find them or gin some up. The USA has for years been arming Islamic rebels in Syria, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Qatar, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and who knows where else. Somalia even. Keerist mon, it's "jus' bidness" to quote the First Torturor, GW Bush.
 
Back
Top Bottom