It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Al Qaeda could be playing both sides in Syria

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 11:04 AM
link   
Well I just finished listening to a commentator on CNN in Dubai was from Syria, and he caught my attention when he said Assad is using Al Qaeda too. So then I went on to research this cause this thought never dawned on me, that they would be playing both sides. I don't mean to muddle the issue even further but I believe this subject is important in lieu of recent events. I found a Bloomberg article that explains just how fractured these islamist groups are considering there is over 1200 of them:




The rise of radical Islamists in Syria came as attempts by Western and Arab countries to support moderate anti-Assad groups failed to unite the opposition or bolster the rebel Free Syrian Army, led mainly by former Assad army officers. Instead, what began as a peaceful uprising turned into a war involving about 1,200 groups, according to U.S. intelligence estimates. Now, some of them have turned against each other.





“They’re a problem now and they will be a big challenge in the next stage,” Sieda said by phone from Istanbul. “If the Free Syrian Army is given proper support properly it will undermine them, but if the Free Syrian Army is not properly backed, these groups will thrive.”


I know being in Algeria, that the gov here infliltrates AQIM to control them, so whats to say that Assad has not done the same thing? Is it possible he has made a deal with some of them that if they fight for him instead, he will implement sharia law? It also further supports the US would be better off backing out now because the outcome is more then uncertain.

www.bloomberg.com...




posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 11:09 AM
link   
Mercenaries for hire is not a thing of the movies, US used them all the time, so is nothing new that in the middle east they are available to the highest bidder and affiliations to any group matters not.

Is all about money and the fact that mercenaries do not hold ties with anybody and can scatter within the population at any time, trying to pin Al-Qaeda specifically to one side or the other is grasping for straws and obviously good propaganda.



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 11:10 AM
link   
and this article states, "why the US will lose in Syria no matter which side wins the war"




The conflict in Syria is more than a nation rising up against a tyrannical leader. Both sides have ties to terrorism and that means that whoever wins, the United States loses.


www.policymic.com...
edit on 2-9-2013 by CottonwoodStormy because: link



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 11:29 AM
link   
and another article, now.mmedia.me... "Assad is no enemy of Al Qaeda"




Last week, General Salim Idris, the head of the Supreme Military Command, made this point for the first time in a little-noticed interview he gave to al-Arabiya, about a fortnight or so after one of his deputy commanders was shot in the chest by the coastal emir of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, the Iraqi-based al-Qaeda syndicate now highly active in Syria. In the course of explaining how these “foreigners” were generally #ing up the noble rebel cause, Idris let slip this comment: “We refuse them strongly because unfortunately they work with the regime of the criminal Bashar al-Assad.”



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by marg6043
 


yah I agree, it just seems you see in the msm always outlining how the rebels are aligned with Al Qaeda but never the Assad affiliations which should be highlighted more.



new topics

top topics
 
1

log in

join