Obama moving toward sending lethal arms to Syrian rebels, officials say

President Obama is preparing to send lethal weaponry to the Syrian opposition and has taken steps to assert more aggressive U.S. leadership among allies and partners seeking the ouster of President Bashar al-Assad, according to senior administration officials.

The officials said they are moving toward the shipment of arms but emphasized that they are still pursuing political negotiation. To that end, the administration has launched an effort to convince Russian President Vladimir Putin that the probable use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government — and the more direct outside intervention that could provoke — should lead him to reconsider his support of Assad.

www.washingtonpost.com... 11e2-bbf2-a6f9e9d79e19_story.html

Link not working first result here: www.google.com...:en-USfficial&cli ent=firefox-a


Guess Obama is taking a page from Charlie Wilson(Democrat), and the US arming of the "rebels" in Afghanistan in the 80s who later formed Al Qaeda which one could argue led to the last decade of the 'War on Terror'.

Had the Russian's won in Afghanistan Al Qaeda would not be the problem they became for the last decade.

Ok maybe that' was a big IF.

Pay attention to the next article:

Nowhere in rebel-controlled Syria is there a secular fighting force to speak of.

www.nytimes.com...

Arming Syrian rebels should not be happening why that is even being considered is sheer stupidity. When the US government actively arms 'terrorist rebels', and 'terrorist state's' one can see easily how the last decade occurred, and they can also see why there is no end in sight.

Obama arms the FSA count on another 10 more.

If Al Qaeda is successful obtaining WMD's from Syria www.telegraph.co.uk...

A CBRN 9-11 style attack will happen there is no question about it.

Yo Obama?

Keep your nose out of Syria screwing up this country not enough for you?

reply to post by neo96


Same ole same ole, then the next thing you know, Amercans will be outraged when one of the weapons brings down a plane filled with Americans..............................

Sigh..............Fast and furious all over again.......

First came mere advise and intelligence support ... then came non-lethal (humanitarian) aid.... Then comes lethal aid. Next will be advisers ...because they'll need help with using those fancy systems effectively, we'll be told. Then some advisers will be killed and we'll need just a 'few' troops to support them.

Next, we'll have Marines landing at Da Na....errr Latakia or Tartus ...because peace must be restored after those few troops get stomped for lack of numbers..

...and we'll all wonder how it ever got to that point. woo-hoo!

Yes well because the US hasnt been giving weapons and equipment to the FSA through unofficial channels... right we need an official channel now - just to piss off Putin. The only right thing to do after this little Obama tantrum is: Russia to go there and obliterate the rebels in a week (because... well because they can, just to piss off Obama if needed) and give Syria back to Assad and then send an email saying "now what?"

Really why is Obama putting the US in such weak positions? I dont quite get him... or what hes trying to accomplish with these actions.

reply to post by neo96

Obama moving toward sending lethal arms to Syrian rebels, officials say

"Officials say"? that we are "moving toward"? supplying arms...

As if the US hasn't been behind that supply line all along. Of course it sounds better to say we aren't, officially speaking.

reply to post by FraternitasSaturni

Yes well because the US hasnt been giving weapons and equipment to the FSA through unofficial channels... right we need an official channel now - just to piss off Putin. The only right thing to do after this little Obama tantrum is: Russia to go there and obliterate the rebels in a week (because... well because they can, just to piss off Obama if needed) and give Syria back to Assad and then send an email saying "now what?"

Really why is Obama putting the US in such weak positions? I dont quite get him... or what hes trying to accomplish with these actions.

I know you are not an American my friend, but if you want to understand what our President is doing???????

Google and read the "Cloward and Piven Strategy"!!!!

His goal is to bring the United States of America to it's knees!

Originally posted by seeker1963
reply to post by FraternitasSaturni

 

Yes well because the US hasnt been giving weapons and equipment to the FSA through unofficial channels... right we need an official channel now - just to piss off Putin. The only right thing to do after this little Obama tantrum is: Russia to go there and obliterate the rebels in a week (because... well because they can, just to piss off Obama if needed) and give Syria back to Assad and then send an email saying "now what?"

Really why is Obama putting the US in such weak positions? I dont quite get him... or what hes trying to accomplish with these actions.

I know you are not an American my friend, but if you want to understand what our President is doing???????

Google and read the "Cloward and Piven Strategy"!!!!

His goal is to bring the United States of America to it's knees!

Hm I see. As you know I'm not all that into that kind of politics so yes I did google it and just read about it.Wow... If true you guys are going to get a bumpy ride... thats a dangerous game.

reply to post by neo96


I can kinda understand the Obama admin's policy re. arming the rebels, at least the "secular" ones, but the problem is trying to figure out which rebels aren't batsh^t crazy, the other problem being that there might not even be any moderate or secular rebels. If you look at this whole conflict in the wider regional context, it kinda makes sense because if the west overthrows Assad, then Syria would be in the western camp in the new proto-cold war starting up in the Mid-East and Pacific. If Syria goes pro-western, that means that Lebanon would almost certainly fall back into the western camp, something it hasn't done since the 50's. Its possible that the admin views Syria as a sort of replacement for Iraq as an ally/client due to the fact that Iraq is increasingly pro-Iran. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if in the next few years you see revived support in the west for an independent Iraqi Kurdistan. If you look at what happened in Libya, you can see that Libya could become a sort of insurance policy for if Egypt becomes completely anti-western/pro-Iran, being that Libya, if it stabilized, has a good chance of become North Africa's version of the UAE/Dubai. That at least seems to be the thinking behind all of these recent moves in U.S. foreign policy. Don't know if I would support all of that, but it seems to make at least a little sense.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
First came mere advise and intelligence support ... then came non-lethal (humanitarian) aid.... Then comes lethal aid. Next will be advisers ...because they'll need help with using those fancy systems effectively, we'll be told. Then some advisers will be killed and we'll need just a 'few' troops to support them.

Next, we'll have Marines landing at Da Na....errr Latakia or Tartus ...because peace must be restored after those few troops get stomped for lack of numbers..

...and we'll all wonder how it ever got to that point. woo-hoo!

Haha, I see what you did there..................

reply to post by Antonio1


I don't enough of with the 'enemy of my enemy is my friend' crap.

Seems to me that what got us in trouble in the first place.

Originally posted by FraternitasSaturni
Yes well because the US hasnt been giving weapons and equipment to the FSA through unofficial channels... right we need an official channel now - just to piss off Putin. The only right thing to do after this little Obama tantrum is: Russia to go there and obliterate the rebels in a week (because... well because they can, just to piss off Obama if needed) and give Syria back to Assad and then send an email saying "now what?"

Really why is Obama putting the US in such weak positions? I dont quite get him... or what hes trying to accomplish with these actions.

I was a staunch supporter of President Obama initially...
Now, on a daily basis, I ask myself - What in god's name is going on in the white house!?

Why is it we keep finding ourselves Continually repeating past mistakes?
The credibility, integrity, assets and overall safety of the United States is jeopardized time and time again. Poor decisions by poor leaders seems to be the name of the game- ultimately sacrificing the lives of friend and foe alike.

Syria should have been dealt with LONG ago. Long before the death toll ticked above the 70,000+ it is now.
At this point nearly any action taken, be it arming the FSA or Strategic Drone Strikes or Boots on the ground - all will result in more lives lost with the potential of arms and chemical weapons being attained by terrorists.

With Iran's Hezbollah militant-group pledging to raise their fist the moment we raise ours.... I wonder if this will simultaneously propel us into military conflict with Iran. The end game in this scenario is bad and getting worse.

War and conflict make a select few very rich. When will humanity get sick of all of it... and see that if there is a SINGLE hope for our species to preserve and further itself - It's Unity.

So it was Obama..not the republicans that suggested this..

McCain calls on Obama to arm Syrian rebels

Two Senators Say U.S. Should Arm Syrian Rebels

The senators, John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, both Republicans, laid out a series of diplomatic, humanitarian and military aid proposals that would put the United States squarely behind the effort to topple President Bashar al-Assad of Syria. The senators, both of whom are on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said that rebel fighters deserved to be armed and that helping them take on the Syrian government would aid Washington’s effort to weaken Iran

Obama just can't win with you guys... He sides with some republicans...he still is the bad guy...oh yeah and also becomes the brains behind it....he goes against the republicans wishes..he is a traitor or weak.

But hey never let facts interfere with a good ol' hate Obama thread... I wonder do you guys just copy and paste from other hate threads...

reply to post by kerazeesicko



Nice political trolling

As this guy makes the call;

President Obama is preparing to send lethal weaponry to the Syrian opposition and has taken steps to assert more aggressive U.S. leadership among allies and partners seeking the ouster of President Bashar al-Assad, according to senior administration officials.

reply to post by kerazeesicko


Well, first, I'd call John McCain a Republican in Name Only ...but that's a personal observation. The best title for him would be senile. Again.. Just my opinion.

More importantly though, Obama and those who follow him can't, on one hand, blame the other side for all that is wrong ...and then suggest Obama is "just following their suggestion" to do even more wrong, somehow making a right decision out of the whole mess.

Wrong is Wrong and the President isn't elected to be a follower or a man prone to taking the direction of others for what he personally opposes. If Obama does this thing, he either supports it or he's not near the leader we need in that position. Democrat or Republican. It doesn't matter on that point. Congress is full of followers. He needs to be the Leader here. Simple as that.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by kerazeesicko

 

Nice political trolling

As this guy makes the call;

President Obama is preparing to send lethal weaponry to the Syrian opposition and has taken steps to assert more aggressive U.S. leadership among allies and partners seeking the ouster of President Bashar al-Assad, according to senior administration officials.

That quote is trolling. Obama has nothing to do with it. Its the State Dept., Pentagon and CIA. They have been arming the insurgents since their little Libya style demise of Syria was vetoed in the UN by China and Russia..

"Preparing to arm Syrian rebels',

Considering that Syria was on Wesley Clark's list of countries to invade
from back in the bush days
this is a bipartisan support of Al CIA duh

so when Al CIA duh bombs the US
who is paying for it?

reply to post by intrptr

That quote is trolling. Obama has nothing to do with it. Its the State Dept., Pentagon and CIA. They have been arming the insurgents since their little Libya style demise of Syria was vetoed in the UN by China and Russia.. "Preparing to arm Syrian rebels',

Really trying to sit there and say. "Obama has nothing to do with it".

Seriously?

He has everything to do with it or why the hell is he even Potus?

reply to post by Danbones


Or was it on GE's ??

Like most viable industrial companies, GE is in a constant state of looking for new business. As one of the world’s largest companies and one of the most recognizable brands in existence, this is only natural. However, GE’s once-troubling close relationships to Iran, Syria and Lybia make an exploration of its past history paramount.

frontpagemag.com...

The close ties to the White House, and GE is well known, as well as what happened in Libya, Syria, and possibly Iran.

Pay close attention to the date of that article. Apr 14.2010 before Syria.

I would completely stay out of it. It always tends to come back and bite us in the a$$.

Send John McCain over there to help, he's always ready to start a war. If he was in office, we would already be in a war with Iran, North Korea and have boots on the ground in Syria. It's career politicians like him that need to be removed from office.

BTW
Thats John MaCain "The Song Bird" of Viet Nam fame
you all know what a "song bird is don't you?