General Discussion

dkf

(37,305 posts)

9. Says who? Early on many were paid by Qatar and were foreign.

Tue Sep 3, 2013, 03:00 AM

Sep 2013

Assad says most rebels are Al Qaeda, we say we haven't armed the Syrian rebels 3 months after weapons were authorized because we can't figure out how to keep them out of AQ hands.

Does it comfort me that the other main backer of the rebels is Saudi Arabia where the majority of 9/11 hijackers are from?

General Dempsey knows more than the both of us and he doesn't want Assad overthrown in favor of AQ extremists.

I am pretty sure you are underestimating their numbers.

Moreover what do you expect the general of the Rebels to say? That AQ are a sizable contingent? Why would he say so when that would cut off his access to the US military?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

60 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The "This doesn't affect us" argument is weak [View all] Zynx Sep 2013 OP

Can't argue with that. nt BootinUp Sep 2013 #1

Actually, arming Al Qaeda in Syria does have a direct impact on us. dkf Sep 2013 #2

AQ is a very small contingent of fighters in Syria ... albeit one of the fiercest ... MindMover Sep 2013 #3

Says who? Early on many were paid by Qatar and were foreign. dkf Sep 2013 #9

Without getting into the rest of that, nothing Assad says is worth listening to. Zynx Sep 2013 #12

There are many Al Qaeda-aligned groups... Hell Hath No Fury Sep 2013 #34

And the longer we continue talking instead of acting, these groups get larger and larger .... MindMover Sep 2013 #38

If we take out Assad - Hell Hath No Fury Sep 2013 #42

I totally agree about the short leash at this moment ... however ... MindMover Sep 2013 #51

Should we attack China Go Vols Sep 2013 #4

How in the name of all that is good in the world did you draw that from what I said? Zynx Sep 2013 #13

Clearly you didn't bother to read the post. n/t pnwmom Sep 2013 #55

More importantly it is dangerous to not only our national security but ... MindMover Sep 2013 #5

I agree with Zynx dem in texas Sep 2013 #6

I believe it is more than punishing the butcher of Damascus ... we cannot just lob a few missiles .. MindMover Sep 2013 #7

We have solution for that... malokvale77 Sep 2013 #8

Exactly. bunnies Sep 2013 #31

True malokvale77 Sep 2013 #60

I don't see any good coming out of limited strikes on Syria. avaistheone1 Sep 2013 #10

Where did I say anything that prompted that response? Zynx Sep 2013 #14

Another take. TM99 Sep 2013 #11

One brief note, the gassing is not the only thing I'm responding to here. Zynx Sep 2013 #17

I read that you stated it was your view. TM99 Sep 2013 #27

good points treestar Sep 2013 #15

No it's not. LWolf Sep 2013 #16

Plenty of people have said "This doesn't affect us at all." Zynx Sep 2013 #21

What value is there in your prattling about what you think others would say in situations Bluenorthwest Sep 2013 #24

That's not really the sentiment that I've been reading here. nt LWolf Sep 2013 #58

I agree with everything you say here deutsey Sep 2013 #18

So you have ironclad proof of... 99Forever Sep 2013 #19

I'm not talking about just the gas attack. If you look at what I said, I specifically said I wasn't. Zynx Sep 2013 #20

Well then.. 99Forever Sep 2013 #23

No one is saying 'to hell with them' and it is fucking offensive to characterize a desire for peace Bluenorthwest Sep 2013 #22

With one major exception ... no other country has used gas to murder its citizens ... MindMover Sep 2013 #25

...except Saddam's Iraq. backscatter712 Sep 2013 #32

Well, this ain't the 80's ... there have been a lot of horrendous mistakes in the middle east ... MindMover Sep 2013 #36

Since you're desperate to Do Something. backscatter712 Sep 2013 #37

I personally believe that a punitive missile strike is not enough ... MindMover Sep 2013 #39

The problem is that the rebels are no better. backscatter712 Sep 2013 #45

I believe the goal is changing to more the degradation of capabilities to allow MindMover Sep 2013 #49

I fail to see how even full airstrikes will eliminate the chem weapons. backscatter712 Sep 2013 #50

I know there are not a lot of good choices ... and you are correct about blowing up MindMover Sep 2013 #52

Regime change just opens up a huge can of worms. backscatter712 Sep 2013 #53

But, we have done all this .... MindMover Sep 2013 #54

"Bomb the shit out of the Syrians"... you have the details of the strike plan? DontTreadOnMe Sep 2013 #29

You're the one peddling "crude shit." The poster was perfectly reasonable. pnwmom Sep 2013 #56

I'm not saying JustAnotherGen Sep 2013 #26

There are evil things happening every day all over the world quinnox Sep 2013 #28

Using your argument, why shouldn't we attack The Sudan, or the Kenya to a lesser extent? bluestate10 Sep 2013 #30

And Congo. bunnies Sep 2013 #35

And mass rape as a tool of war. Hell Hath No Fury Sep 2013 #43

Rapes? meh. Theres only been about 2 million of those. bunnies Sep 2013 #46

Weak. backscatter712 Sep 2013 #33

Yes, it does affect us. shenmue Sep 2013 #40

how about this one? mike_c Sep 2013 #41

Shouldn't we deal with our own war criminals first? reusrename Sep 2013 #57

No one on this board EVER said: Le Taz Hot Sep 2013 #44

If we find conclusive evidence that -- Hell Hath No Fury Sep 2013 #47

Oh, please. ocpagu Sep 2013 #48

The selective enforcement of "atrocities" being hypocritical and "morally vacant." Precisely Sep 2013 #59