« Make money on the moon, or asteroids, or somewhere... | Main | A Morgenthau Plan for Iran? »

11 December 2013

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Bandolero

My favorite line in that story:

“Assistance continues through other neighboring countries to other parts of Syria” ... Psaki said.

Where would that "assistance" end up? Of course in the hands of "moderate rebels" (tm) and not in the hands of "islamist militants." Well! Duh!

Bandolero

BTW, lovely, the coverage of the WSJ of that event:

“He (Salim Idris) fled as a result of the Islamic Front taking over his headquarters,” a senior U.S. official said.

http://stream.wsj.com/story/latest-headlines/SS-2-63399/SS-2-403262/

Fred

I listened to the hand-ringing BBC correspondent interviewed on NPR on my drive home. She was bemoaning the snow currently falling on Homs. I could not help but think of the biblical reference regarding rain.

Ishmael Zechariah

Colonel,

Obama never met his uncle either. Are these folks really that gullible or is there something else going on?

Ishmael Zechariah

turcopolier

IZ

That is his personal stupidity. This is collective stupidity. pl

Eliot

They will take anything of value by force of arms. You might as well ship them directly to the Jihadis and save everyone else the trouble.

And those weapons will linger, we've seen Enfields in Afghanistan with the crown stamp on the receiver. In Libya we've encountered Italian rifles from the colonial period. That's something to consider next time we start dumping guns into a conflict.

Charles

Colonel Lang,
That same collective stupidly also infected both of our Senators and our Representative. We Also live in Alexandria and wrote asking them to vote against attacking Syria. They replied that they were better informed than us and would in fact vote to attack. We will not be voting for any of the three in the future.
Regards,

robt willmann

I read an article that this "Islamic Front" umbrella organization that was recently formed to continue to fight against the Syrian government of Assad was primarily the creation of Saudi Arabia, but I cannot now find the article to cite it. But it makes sense that this is how it was formed, unless the U.S. government was also involved in creating it.

The beaver

Robt

"Sayigh argued that the Islamic Front is likely an attempt by Saudi Arabia to form a unified and credible rebel army that can overthrow Assad on the battlefield."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/22/syria-rebels-islamic-front_n_4324171.html

From Al-Monitor:
"This new Saudi-backed Islamic Front is a fusion of Salafist jihadist Islamist groups, not as extreme in Ideology as al-Qaeda’s Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) or Jabhat al-Nusra, but nevertheless by no means mainstream like the FSA. It openly calls for Islamic Sharia rule instead of secular democracy, and was even implicated in sectarian war crimes like the Latakia province incidents documented by Human Rights Watch."

Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2013/12/syria-fsa-islamic-front-geneva-ii-jarba.html##ixzz2nGxs7kpA


William Fitzgerald

I have been of the opinion, since reports of American aid and support to the rebels began appearing, that we were aiding and supporting the wrong side. In attempting to ferret out reasons for the administration's position on Syria, I've come up with several fairly obvious ones.
First, a group of people in policy making positions who are besotted with the whole notion of the "Arab spring". As always, the compulsion to keep AIPAC satisfied, Similarly, a perceived need to stay ahead of the "two (formerly three) Amigos" on the issue. Lastly, some notion of the value of poking Iran and Russia in the eye.

There's not much serious strategic thinking apparent in this. The irony is that Russia, with the help of Parliament,saved us from a foreign policy disaster in September. Had we attacked Syria, I think it quite probable that we would still be doing it, the rebels, mainly Salafi jihadists would be in the ascendant and the status of the United States as a rational player would be in serious doubt.

WPFIII

Bandolero

"... not as extreme in Ideology as al-Qaeda’s Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) or Jabhat al-Nusra ..."

Reuters just reported on the newest activities of the "Islamic Front" under the command of their leader Zahran Alloush:

Islamists kill 15 Alawite and Druze civilians in Syria: activists

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/12/12/us-syria-crisis-adra-idUSBRE9BB0PM20131212

Regarding the "not as extreme" ideology of the "Islamic Front" just listen to their leader Zahran Alloush publicly advocating the torture and execution of civilians from religious sects he don't like - with English translation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPLUhSy4vZ4

Tyler

Obama was set to kick off WWIII based off some youtube clips. These are the geniuses we have at the head of the leviathan right now.

If it was only the foreign policy that was a wreck, well hey that wouldn't be so bad, but the idiots are currently in the process of wrecking my backyard as well.

Thomas

Abu Bully and the Boys are stealing their militia money!

In fairness to the Islamic Front, they say another faction attacked, they answered a call for support and, after arriving, the FSA gave them the keys to the place and walked away.

Mark Logan

William Fitzgerald,

I saw somebody ask a very intelligent question of Rep. Mike Rogers, the head of the House Intell. Committee, the other day. "What did the intelligence community get so wrong when they predicted that Assad had no chance and would fall quickly?"

He replied that they underestimated the support Russia and Iran would give him. I think that is also wrong because I think underestimating Assad's domestic support too was an even bigger mistake, but I am not the most expert judge of it here and hope to be corrected if wrong.

The point I wish to make is that was what Obama was apparently told at the onset, but his recent actions indicate he now knows it was wrong, and that question and answer by Rodgers shows "everybody" else now does too.

I think it possible Obama and Putin bluffed Assad into giving up his stocks, and they did it because attacking the rebels made no tactical sense if the goal was just the limited one of getting the CW out of there.

William Fitzgerald

Mark Logan,

I don't believe that Obama and Putin planned a "good cop - bad cop" approach in September. We'll probably be able to find out when scholars have access to the Obama Presidential Library in 2035 A.D., or thereabouts. I should add, to the four probable reasons I postulated for the "Let's attack Syria." movement, the absurd red line statements by which the administration so neatly boxed themselves in. Intelligence estimates, except for those designed to further the policy, don't seem to have had much to do with with what was almost a disaster.

WPFIII

D

For the war crime files:
Alleged to be CCTV camera footage from the hospital in ADRA, Syria, that was invaded by salafist terrorists.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WtQAF4TDo0
Few things upset me more than seeing doctors and nurses cut down in cold blood.

bth

So we will arm the Salafists if they give us back our comms equipment?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/dec/13/obama-mulls-support-islamists-syria-conditions/#.Uqt7VvnK8Eg.facebook

Babak Makkinejad

That is in fact the attack on Yemen Defense ministry compound.

Hawkwood

Colonel,

I am not sure what to be more amazed by. That the Saudi's are being so openly antagonistic or that the Murdoch press would print such an obvious response piece. Interesting times.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/world/saudi-prince-blasts-obama-20131216-hv5vl.html

http://nypost.com/2013/12/15/inside-the-saudi-911-coverup/

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

May 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            
Blog powered by Typepad