• 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

MMC said:
Mornin' 24 :2wave: Now that was a waste.....if anything. He should have started showing those ISIS members. What is meant by Pounding Sand. Juuuuuust sayin!
Click to expand...
Your right, but I think he must have lost his mind after seeing what happened.
 
24107 said:
Your right, but I think he must have lost his mind after seeing what happened.
Click to expand...

Well they did let him live and went about their business.....he should have got his people out then. Someplace safe. Then told his people. He has business to attend to. He will be out late and attending some personal meetings.

th



I think they would know not to leave any leftovers laying around. KnowwhatImean.
yo2.gif
 
MMC said:
Well they did let him live and went about their business.....he should have got his people out then. Someplace safe. Then told his people. He has business to attend to. He will be out late and attending some personal meetings.

th



I think they would know not to leave any leftovers laying around. KnowwhatImean.
yo2.gif
Click to expand...
Exactly, what would anyone have to lose after witnessing that happen.
 
The US waged two unnecessary wars, sacrificed American lives, spent trillions, just to get rid of two individuals without looking at the big picture.
 
RDS said:
The US waged two unnecessary wars, sacrificed American lives, spent trillions, just to get rid of two individuals without looking at the big picture.
Click to expand...

There you have it. An accurate analysis of the situation condensed into one sentence. Bravo.
 
.
Disentangling The Lies

By Jim Kirwan
6-30-14



Who‘s the Client and Who are the real Operatives
In and around ISIS?
*
All that anyone who wanted to know more about ISIS had to do was just Google them and look at who their clients are * that should end any more speculation about who is serving who and to what end!
https://public.isishq.com/public/clients/default.aspx
Go to the site navigation bar and play till your hearts’ content.

https://public.isishq.com/public/SitePages/Home.aspx
This is their home page that details what they do for their clients.

“ISIS, an American company modeled after Blackwater, vows to destroy Mecca. Keep in mind with this threat to destroy Mecca that ISIS is an American military intelligence company that manages and trains insurgents abroad, and they have headquarters in Iraq.
So when you hear that ISIS has vowed to destroy Mecca, and that Muslims have vowed to destroy Mecca, keep in mind that this really is THE JEWISH CONTROLLED AMERICAN MILITARY SUB CONTRACTING WITH AN AMERICAN INTELLIGENCE FRONT COMPANY, SIMILAR TO BLACKWATER, AND IS HAVING THEM MAKE THREATS TO DESTROY MECCA. Real headline? JEWS VOW TO DESTROY MECCA. The proof is right here, via the company I have linked.”
ISIS Vows To Destroy Mecca. Proof ISIS Is An American Company | Alternative
This entire chapter in chaos theory 101 is devoted to absolute confusion, on all fronts, to destroy any cohesion between any groups of either religious or nationalistic supporters, of any and all facets, to the point of total annihilation for the entire region. The current bid to create a new Islamic State is just more garbage meant to obscure what’s really going on.
What will probably be far more interesting will be who will nominate this new criminal state to the UN?
The back stories about Saudi Arabia and their allies working to support these barbarians, falls into the same category as the fact that ironically none of these fake-associations will ever attack Israel under any condition: Because Israel is behind this entire scenario.
On the list of clients of ISIS, remember that the US corporations or companies listed are owned by USI. US Inc is also owned by Israel, which makes this whole operation just another shadow government affair, designed by Israel to mislead the world, while Israel contents herself with intensifying her slaughter of unarmed Palestinian’s, in both Gaza and the West Bank. And all of this is
PAID FOR BY YOU & ME!
So much for the new Islamic Jewish State or whatever the hell it ends up being called & its' supposedly
All powerful and totally independent forces.
The whole damned operation is being produced here!

Some possible good news!

Tomorrow is the day that Barry signed for, in his own legislation, to alter the value of the U.S. Dollar on July 1, 2014. I called the bank today, to see if they had heard anything about the pending 30% reduction in the value of the U.S. Dollar, domestically.
U$ Dollar 2Collapse ’cause U.S. House of Representative Bill
“Absolutely the first they’d heard about anything like that”
the manager said: And she hastened to assure me that if that were the case the bank would have to have been told and ‘yes’ if that was happening they would certainly notify all their clients…
So perhaps that intended devaluation might not be happening tomorrow after all. Of course, if not then that would only be a temporary reprieve, because this $60 trillion dollar hole cannot continue without making that change ~ but hey, at least maybe tomorrow won’t be quite what Barry seemed so determined to create!
News from the Kiev Front

“As Itar-Tass reports, citing Gazprom CEO Alexei Miller, "Russia’s gas giant Gazprom does not rule out gas transit via Ukraine may be stopped completely."

"What happened once is a tendency, nothing happens incidentally. In 2009, gas supplies were stopped completely — so, we know precedents,” Miller told a briefing on Friday.

Clearly, this is bad news for Ukraine: Gazprom not interested in participation in Ukraine’s gas transportation system (GTS), “train has departed”, CEO said.

“The train has already departed. It seems it departed yesterday,” Miller said. “It belongs to no one. The GTS has no owner,” he said. “The GTS of Ukraine does not belong to Naftogaz but to the Ukrainian government. Before discussing things with someone regarding modernization and cooperation, it should appear on the balance sheet of this or that economic entity.”
“Property and legal issues should be resolved first,” Miller said.
In fact, the civil war torn country may soon lose all leverage it had with both Europe and Russia as a transit hub for natural gas, which also means that it is quite likely that Ukraine is about to be abandoned by its western allies who will no longer have any practical use for it.

The Gazprom chief added that “a dozen Ukrainian laws need to be changed to be able to do something with the GTS.”

Confirming that Ukraine's leverage at least with Russia is now effectively zero, Gazprom's CEO also said that “As for the continuation of negotiations with Ukraine, today there is no subject for talks. First, they must repay their debts."”

Russia Reveals "Plan B": Gazprom Says Gas Transit Via Ukraine May Be Stopped Completely | Zero Hedge
Meanwhile Obamanation says the nightmare in Iraq is a threat to American National Security here.
BE AFRAID, BE VERY AFRAID AMERICA!
Because the ISIS TERRORISTS are coming here soon!

“US President Barack Obama warns that “battle-hardened” Europeans who are fighting in Syria and Iraq threaten the US.

“We have seen Europeans sympathetic to their (militants') cause traveling into Syria and may now travel into Iraq, getting battle-hardened ... (the militants) have a European passport. They don't need visas to get into the United States," ABC News “This Week” program.”
‘ABC NEW’ is the official mouthpiece for the USG, just a cautionary note, in case anyone was wondering.
‘Hey Barry that old-dog is dead. It just can’t hunt anymore!’
PressTV - Obama: European terrorists threat to US
The world has your number and besides your time in the fake-spotlight is definitely over: It’s time to begin rehearsals for your coming stint in the dock at the Universal Court of Justice for Crimes Against Humanity… But then I guess they won’t give you a teleprompter for that performance - will they?

kirwanstudios@sbcglobal.net
 
Dittohead not! said:
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.
Click to expand...

Weren't any good guys in the Iran-Iraq War, but we were tied up in that too.

Generally the goal in the Middle East is to (1) make sure there are no conflicts that could spark a regional war and (2) in the the interests of #1 ensure no single religious or ethnic group gets the military or economic heft to rule the rest. In CIA logic, sometimes to prevent regional conflicts you have to stimulate local conflicts.

Historically, the reward for fulfilling these goals is a consistent and reliable source of the energy we need to be a large, industrialized nation.

Frankly, in international relations, "taking a side" is the same thing as "making a side." A faction that becomes reliant on the U.S. and can count on their diplomatic and military support, even if they started out as anti-Western, can quickly become amenable when the benefits of cooperation are made clear.
 
Last edited:
RDS said:
The US waged two unnecessary wars, sacrificed American lives, spent trillions, just to get rid of two individuals without looking at the big picture.
Click to expand...

Oh, but they earned their buddies some serious cash in the process.
 
No. "Rebels in Syria" =/= "ISIS" any more than "people in America" = "Democrats". It is very possible ISIS has stolen, captured, or overrun American aid to other rebel groups just as it has stolen, captured, and overrun American equipment given to the Iraqi Forces. To take this and claim that the US is arming ISIS in such a manner as to suggest that it is a matter of policy, however, is either uninformed or dishonest. I don't know which Paul is, sadly, I would suspect the latter in this case, as the accurate picture is available to him, but does not allow him to grandstand.
 
cpwill said:
No. "Rebels in Syria" =/= "ISIS" any more than "people in America" = "Democrats". It is very possible ISIS has stolen, captured, or overrun American aid to other rebel groups just as it has stolen, captured, and overrun American equipment given to the Iraqi Forces. To take this and claim that the US is arming ISIS in such a manner as to suggest that it is a matter of policy, however, is either uninformed or dishonest. I don't know which Paul is, sadly, I would suspect the latter in this case, as the accurate picture is available to him, but does not allow him to grandstand.
Click to expand...

Mmmm, yes. Because we've never armed rebels, over overstepped Congress to sell arms to buddies who would surely always be our friends so that we could fund rebels elsewhere. And those never came back to bite us in the ass or end up with aid or arms falling into the wrong hands. Nope. Never.
 
Morality Games said:
Weren't any good guys in the Iran-Iraq War, but we were tied up in that too.

Generally the goal in the Middle East is to (1) make sure there are no conflicts that could spark a regional war and (2) in the the interests of #1 ensure no single religious or ethnic group gets the military or economic heft to rule the rest. In CIA logic, sometimes to prevent regional conflicts you have to stimulate local conflicts.

Historically, the reward for fulfilling these goals is a consistent and reliable source of the energy we need to be a large, industrialized nation.

Frankly, in international relations, "taking a side" is the same thing as "making a side." A faction that becomes reliant on the U.S. and can count on their diplomatic and military support, even if they started out as anti-Western, can quickly become amenable when the benefits of cooperation are made clear.
Click to expand...

I would disagree with goal number 1, China and Russia both warned three years ago that US interference in president Assad's war on terror would cause the conflict to spill out into the whole region. This is why after being duped in Libya, they both blocked all attempts by the US to secure a resolution for the use of force in Syria. US foreign policy in the ME has been to support militant Islam and instability for decades now.
 
cpwill said:
No. "Rebels in Syria" =/= "ISIS" any more than "people in America" = "Democrats". It is very possible ISIS has stolen, captured, or overrun American aid to other rebel groups just as it has stolen, captured, and overrun American equipment given to the Iraqi Forces. To take this and claim that the US is arming ISIS in such a manner as to suggest that it is a matter of policy, however, is either uninformed or dishonest. I don't know which Paul is, sadly, I would suspect the latter in this case, as the accurate picture is available to him, but does not allow him to grandstand.
Click to expand...

Paul's not grandstanding. It's a documented fact that as a matter of policy, US presidents have armed, financed and otherwise supported militant Islamist groups, since at least Carter.
 
Ikari said:
Mmmm, yes. Because we've never armed rebels, over overstepped Congress to sell arms to buddies who would surely always be our friends so that we could fund rebels elsewhere. And those never came back to bite us in the ass or end up with aid or arms falling into the wrong hands. Nope. Never.
Click to expand...

I'm wondering where he made those claims. Hell, in that post he said that our military aid to rebels likely ended up in the wrong hands.
 
Montecresto said:
Paul's not grandstanding. It's a documented fact that as a matter of policy, US presidents have armed, financed and otherwise supported militant Islamist groups, since at least Carter.
Click to expand...

:doh

Militant Islamist Groups also =/= ISIS. Paul is indeed grandstanding.

MadLib said:
I'm wondering where he made those claims. Hell, in that post he said that our military aid to rebels likely ended up in the wrong hands.
Click to expand...

Well it's not exactly as if he's bringing logic to bear.
 
Ikari said:
Mmmm, yes. Because we've never armed rebels, over overstepped Congress to sell arms to buddies who would surely always be our friends so that we could fund rebels elsewhere. And those never came back to bite us in the ass or end up with aid or arms falling into the wrong hands. Nope. Never.
Click to expand...

Oh look!

A Strawman!

strawman-full.jpg
 
cpwill said:
:doh

Militant Islamist Groups also =/= ISIS. Paul is indeed grandstanding.



Well it's not exactly as if he's bringing logic to bear.
Click to expand...

The US has supported militant Islamic groups for decades, what's the point.
 
Montecresto said:
The US has supported militant Islamic groups for decades, what's the point.
Click to expand...

The point is that Paul's claim was that we have supported ISIS, which is false, and which is easily demonstrably false, meaning that Paul either has no idea what he is talking about, or is lying.
 
cpwill said:
Oh look!

A Strawman!

strawman-full.jpg
Click to expand...

No it's not. You claim that we're not doing this and that Paul is lying, but offer no proof. Your statements had come off as rather absolute. I was merely pointing out that arming rebels is what we do, we'll do it secretly and against the directives of Congress if we must. We've trained and armed organizations which have turned around and fought us. It seems quite possible that we could have been buddy, buddy with ISIS at their start. But you have the knowledge that says otherwise, so why don't you detail how you came about this knowledge.
 
Sherman123 said:
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.
Click to expand...

If Paul were to argue that arming the rebels increases the risk that weapons could wind up in the hands of ISIS, increase the kind of unstable situation that ISIS can exploit, etc., that would be technically correct. His claim that the U.S. is "arming" ISIS has no basis in fact.
 
cpwill said:
The point is that Paul's claim was that we have supported ISIS, which is false, and which is easily demonstrably false, meaning that Paul either has no idea what he is talking about, or is lying.
Click to expand...

Whether Paul is wrong about that particular brand, I don't know. That brand of militant Islamists has been swelling its ranks with militant Islamists from other groups that demonstrably have received US support. So the point is, had US policy been ME stability, we wouldn't have supported militant Islamic groups since the Carter administration.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom