US to arm Syrian rebels

UndercoverElephant · Post by **UndercoverElephant** » 14 Jun 2013, 08:45

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22899289

The US is to supply direct military aid to the Syrian opposition for the first time, the White House has announced.

So...Russia and Iran are supplying direct military aid to the Assad regime and now the US, in addition to Europe, is to supply direct military aid to the rebels. Looks to me like we now have a Vietnam-like situation: a full-blown proxy war between the US and two of its key enemies, with no winner looking likely any time soon.

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 14 Jun 2013, 09:09

UndercoverElephant wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22899289

The US is to supply direct military aid to the Syrian opposition for the first time, the White House has announced.
So...Russia and Iran are supplying direct military aid to the Assad regime and now the US, in addition to Europe, is to supply direct military aid to the rebels. Looks to me like we now have a Vietnam-like situation: a full-blown proxy war between the US and two of its key enemies, with no winner looking likely any time soon.

Yes. If people think the Syrians have suffered enough already, they've seen nothing yet. This kind of proxy war fought between Russia and America in the one of the countries of this region is not new. The Iran/Iraq proxy war between the Russians and the Yanks springs to mind. Or, even, the ousting of the Russians from Afghanistan by the US funded and equipped Taliban back in the Eighties.

It goes without saying, whether or not it ends well for the proxy players, it will end very badly for the Syrians themselves.

RenewableCandy · Post by **RenewableCandy** » 14 Jun 2013, 15:37

Oh F--k

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 14 Jun 2013, 16:52

To stop a war:
Plan A, supply weapons and training.

(Other plans may be available.)

syberberg · Post by **syberberg** » 14 Jun 2013, 17:27

There's no way this will stay inside Syria's borders. Especially not once the jihadis reach the Israeli border, unless Hezbollah intercept them first.

RenewableCandy · Post by **RenewableCandy** » 14 Jun 2013, 17:33

I visited the Golan Heights a couple of years ago. The (Israeli) display there was terribly proud that "There has been peace on the Golan since 1974"

I thought, crikey I can remember what I was doing in 1974...it's no time at all!

Looks as if they're going to need a new display

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 14 Jun 2013, 17:42

syberberg wrote:There's no way this will stay inside Syria's borders. Especially not once the jihadis reach the Israeli border, unless Hezbollah intercept them first.

Maybe it's a roundabout way for the USA to have a war with Iran.

Lord Beria3 · Post by **Lord Beria3** » 14 Jun 2013, 22:33

I've shifted my opinion.

It’s clearly only a matter of time until the extremists of both sides of Islam's religious divide (Shia and Sunni) clash and drive their respective populations into a Islamic Thirty Years War.

Until Muslims accept that religion is a private thing and should not mix with politics/state than it inevitable that this clash will occur. Islam needs a Reformation and sadly, as Europe knows all too well, we had to go through a Thirty Years War until even the most fanatical Catholic, Anglican and Lutheran recognised that their faith wasn't worth the mass suffering, death and war that their OWN extreme fanaticism and views had led to.

When the great majority of Sunnis and Shia's say ENOUGH, and reject the extremists and the religious identity politics that they thrive on... than the Arabic world can start to move into the 21st century.

Without planning to, Western foreign policy (driven by a geopolitical fear of Iran - exaggerated in my opinion) is encouraging and speeding up this process of a 'cold' war between the two Houses of Islam (Shia and Sunni) into a hot war. Let me make clear, the West isn't causing this war; it is only speeding up the process of it going 'hot'.

The secondary aspect is that there has always been a chance that the Sunnis and Shia camps would agree to a truce and lead a joint war against Israel. When they are fighting each other across the region, Israel is safe from destruction.

Lord Beria3 · Post by **Lord Beria3** » 14 Jun 2013, 22:47

Just to make myself clear...

I don't support the current policy of arming rebels - I think we should keep out of the conflict. However, although the Syrian civil war/cum regional slide towards religious wars is a disaster for ordinary people, it is inevitable if the mass of the populations vote and support Islamist movements.

Therefore, the masses must learn, and it looks like they will only the learn the hard way, that mixing religion and politics is a bad idea.

Post by **adam2** » 15 Jun 2013, 09:37

I am not in agreement with arming or otherwise assisting the rebels.

In SOME conflicts I can see the merit in assisting the good side, but in this case I have little sympathy with either lot.
I would not wish to prop up a despotic dictatorship, but neither would I wish to encourage the rebels who seem to consist largely of hardline islamists who might well make war on US or our interests once we have armed them.

vtsnowedin · Post by **vtsnowedin** » 15 Jun 2013, 10:23

1. The world has a population problem.
2. The overpopulation is harming the enviroment.
3. Reducing the worlds population would be a good thing.
4. Reducing your own personel population is a bad thing.
5. If we send weapons to the ME they will kill each other reducing the population which would be a good thing.
6. The winners will breed like rabbits which will be a bad thing.
7. Conclusion: arm both sides, let them fight it out then shoot the winners.

nexus · Post by **nexus** » 15 Jun 2013, 10:32

Wow VT -lets hope that post was a sick joke, otherwise where do you even start with the immorality of the last post. Plus I see that the myth of American Exceptionalism is alive and well in your head.

vtsnowedin · Post by **vtsnowedin** » 15 Jun 2013, 10:48

nexus wrote:Wow VT -lets hope that post was a sick joke, otherwise where do you even start with the immorality of the last post. Plus I see that the myth of American Exceptionalism is alive and well in your head.

Notice the devil sticker at the beginning? That should be sufficent as a qualifier. There is nothing exceptional about the USA other then the numbers of air craft carriers we have on the seas.
A sick joke? More like a dark prediction of a real possible outcome.

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 15 Jun 2013, 11:27

vtsnowedin wrote: 1. The world has a population problem.
2. The overpopulation is harming the enviroment.
3. Reducing the worlds population would be a good thing.
4. Reducing your own personel population is a bad thing.
5. If we send weapons to the ME they will kill each other reducing the population which would be a good thing.
6. The winners will breed like rabbits which will be a bad thing.
7. Conclusion: arm both sides, let them fight it out then shoot the winners.

You're joking...right?

UndercoverElephant · Post by **UndercoverElephant** » 15 Jun 2013, 12:11

vtsnowedin wrote: There is nothing exceptional about the USA...

Yes there is. Only in the US could this be considered a sane way of looking at things (see "George ought to help.")

http://www.libertyclassroom.com/you-sig ... -contract/

Basically, the person who has created this video (and used an English voice-over to make it seem a little less extreme/insane) is very upset that public money is used to educate the children of poor people. He actually wants to return to a world where the children of the poor end up illiterate because he thinks it is an appalling infringement of his own rights and freedoms that he be asked to pay taxes to pay for stuff like this. It is truly backwards, in every sense of that word, and nowhere else in the western world do people actually believe stuff like this.

PowerSwitch

US to arm Syrian rebels

US to arm Syrian rebels

Re: US to arm Syrian rebels