U.S. Wants to Bomb ISIS In Syria … Maybe We Should (cough) First Stop ARMING THEM?

If We Stop Arming, Funding and Training Terrorists, then Maybe We Won’t Have to Bomb Them Later

U.S. foreign policy is schizophrenic.

The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff says we need to attack the Sunni militants in Syria.

The deputy national security adviser to President Obama says we should go after ISIS in Syria.

Okay …

But the U.S. and our closest allies have long supported Sunni militants.

And the U.S. and our closest allies have been arming and training Islamic jihadists in Syria for years. And see this, this, this and this.

You don’t have to be a rocket scientist or a fortune-teller to have known this was a bad idea.

As Michael Shank – Adjunct Faculty and Board Member at George Mason University’s School for Conflict Analysis and Resolution, and director of foreign policy at the Friends Committee on National Legislation – warned a year ago:

The Senate and House Intelligence committees’ about-face decision last week to arm the rebels in Syria is dangerous and disconcerting. The weapons will assuredly end up in the wrong hands and will only escalate the slaughter in Syria. Regardless of the vetting procedures in place, the sheer factionalized nature of the opposition guarantees that the arms will end up in some unsavory hands. The same militant fighters who have committed gross atrocities are among the best-positioned of the rebel groups to seize the weapons that the United States sends to Syria.

Congress can still join with the 70 percent of Americans who oppose arming Syria rebels and heed former National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski’s caution against arming the rebels (he called the Obama administration’s decision to do so “a mess in the making“) ….

Arming one side of Syria’s multi-sided and bloody civil war will come back to haunt us. Past decisions by the U.S. to arm insurgencies in Libya, Angola, Central America and Afghanistan helped sustain brutal conflicts in those regions for decades. In the case of Afghanistan, arming the mujahideen in the 1980s created the instability that emboldened extreme militant groups and gave rise to the Taliban, which ultimately created an environment for al Qaeda to thrive.

There is no unified command or control in the Syrian opposition, as was the case of the Afghan mujahideen. And due to the United States’ long history of diplomatically isolating Syria, we know even less about the nature of Syria’s opposition. The excuse that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” is often invoked to justify anti-Assad forces. This short-sighted excuse has gained the U.S. enemies around the world, undermining U.S. national security. The same justification was used by the Bush administration in its collaboration with the Assad regime to torture suspected militants in Syria. Arming the enemies of our enemies hasn’t made the U.S. more friends; it has made the U.S. more enemies.


Some armed opposition factions, including powerful Islamist coalitions, reject negotiation altogether. Yet these are the same groups that will likely seize control of U.S.-supplied weapons, just as they’ve already seized control of the bulk of the rebels’ weaponry.


When you lift the curtain on the armed groups with the most formidable military presence on the ground in Syria, you find the Al Nusra Front and Al Farough Brigades. Both groups are closely aligned with Al Qaeda and have directly perpetrated barbaric atrocities. The Al Nusra Front has been charged with beheadings of civilians, while a commander from the Al Farough Brigades reportedly ate the heart of a pro-Assad soldier.

Shank’s warning was ignored, and his worst fears came to pass.

And the U.S. is still financing the jihadis in Syria. For example, the government is pushing an additional $500 million in arms to the jihadis.

We are literally bombing our own weapons.

A similar dynamic is operating in Iraq. Specifically, the U.S. is now arming the “Peshmerga” (i.e. the Kurdish soldiers).

But the Wall Street Journal notes that there are reports that Peshmerga are fighting side-by-side with the PKK  … a group designated as terrorists by the U.S.:

A U.S. defense official couldn’t confirm whether the meeting took place and stressed in response to reports that the PKK was fighting alongside the Peshmerga that “it’s hard to tell from Washington who’s on the front line in a Kurdish-Iraqi fight.”

The U.S. has designated the PKK a terrorist organization, and the U.S. “doesn’t do business with them,” the official added.

By arming the Peshmerga, the U.S. is also putting weapons into the hands of the PKK.

If we stop arming, funding and training terrorists, then maybe we won’t have to bomb them later.

This entry was posted in Politics / World News. Bookmark the permalink.
  • mmckinl

    Too True once again WB …

  • Going down with the ship

    So anyhow, I’m wondering. Is it still Pres. Cheney with first GWB and then Obama as figureheads? Not only did the latter fail to prosecute his predecessor (and President Cheney) for war crimes. But he left Bush’s key financial and foreign policy personnel in place – with the stellar results we are now witnessing. Why wasn’t Nuland fired?? I’m beginning to smell a rat.

    • jadan

      You can only smell a rat when it’s dead, and the failure of the best laid plans of US “intelligence” is what you smell. World domination is a tricky business. Often one ends up destroying the world one wishes to dominate.

  • Rehmat

    Why not bomb Israel. After all ISIS was created to destroy Israel’s regional enemies in the first place.


    • Florence Burt

      I earns a lot of money through online jobs .i get paid ninety Four dollars(94$) per hour working from home with 3 kids at home. I never thought I’d be able to do it but my best friend earns over SEVENTEENk(17k) a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless and successful . Heres what have been doing ……













      for more info, coPy it and open it in new tab…..

    • RealityAlwaysBites

      Start bombing israels enemies and you might end up with a barren earth.

  • Scot

    …but then what would become of the military industrial complex, or Israel’s economy (which is 50% defense spending)?

  • Robert Barsocchini

    Agree with the main point here, but I would point to two unproven assumptions:

    1) The US did not intend for the weapons to go to ISIS-like groups.
    2) The US does not want to bomb things whenever it can, using whatever pretext it can, to protect the interests of the people who influence the US government: elite domestic people/groups. ISIS is an effective pretext for them.

    The USA said it wanted the weapons to go to “moderates”. They never explained who these “moderates” were. In the past, the USA has referred to as “moderates” and/or “freedom fighters”, and supported, the following people/groups, among many others:

    Hitler (early on)
    Saddam Hussein, through killing 1,000,000 Iranians and gassing the Kurds
    The Mujahedeen
    Israeli Commandos
    Al Qaeda

    The USA saying it intended to arm “moderates” means less than nothing.

    Obama was forced to leave Iraq because Maliki wouldn’t sign agreement to make US troops immune to Iraqi law. ISIS, supported by US allies/NATO countries and “accidentally” by the US, has now driven out Maliki, and also provided a new reason for the US to go back into Iraq.

    And, yeah, Western oil companies have made a fortune from Iraqi oil since the US invaded. US order #33 in Iraq gave first priority to American energy companies.

    • RealityAlwaysBites

      Washington DC is the highest concentration of mentally damaged psychopaths and war mongering traitors in the known universe. you don’t throw a rock in DC without hitting several well known enemies of mankind.

  • If we would bomb ISIS and start a war for a beheading, imagine what we’re going to do to Israel for murdering 500 children!!!!!!!!!!

    • MCB

      Those children are just “collateral damage” BD…

  • If ISIS had reporter Foley (whom they fake beheaded) and the other reporter Peter Curtis, how is it AL QAEDA just released Curtis, and not ISIS??? Am I missing something here?

    Held for nearly two years in a prison run by an affiliate of Al Qaeda in Syria, an American freelance writer was unexpectedly freed on Sunday, following extensive mediation by Qatar, the tiny Gulf emirate and United States ally that has successfully negotiated the release of numerous Western hostages in exchange for multimillion-dollar ransoms.


    And after Jihad whateverhisbnameis said he was going to behead Curtis next??? Then Curtis is released in record time by ANOTHER group Al Qaeda?

    Someone wanna ‘SPLAIN DAT to me???? Are they getting sloppy with their FALSE FLAGS???

    Foley murder video ‘may have been staged’

    Analysts believe the British jihadi in the video may not have been James Foley’s killer, although it is accepted that the journalist was murdered


    • MCB

      The Hegelian Dialect is an overdrive here for sure bro.

  • RealityAlwaysBites

    Find the traitors that OK’d the arming of religious monkeys and shoot them as they deserve.
    The war mongering psychopaths in DC need to be put on trial and executed.

  • Thanks for the useful information. I will look forward to your next article. Thanks for sharing, that is really useful to me.Swing Thanks for sharing, that is really useful to me.