5 ms·

> The anti-terrrorism community has adopted the intelligence community mindset. This is a problem. Wonder how much that has to do with overlap between the two.

> The anti-terrrorism community has adopted the intelligence community mindset. This is a problem. Wonder how much that has to do with overlap between the two. Today's terrorist may well have been yesterday's informat, and may well be an informant again tomorrow. After all, the CIA was deeply involved in Afghanistan back when the USSR was fighting there. And many of the people that the CIA supported then later turned against USA.

mtgx 9y ago
And then the CIA allied again with alQaeda when fighting Assad. And round and round it goes. Too bad the public is made a to be a sucker every time.
- simonh 9y ago
  They didn't 'ally with Al Qaeda', they just both happened to be opposed to the same guy while also being opposed to each other. It's a complicated situation out there. Even at the height of the Cold War, sometimes the CIA and KGB would share information of mutual benefit. That didn't mean the CIA was allying with communism. Even Trump has learned this when his 'bombing Syria is the wrong thing to do, what Assad gets up to is non America's business anymore' policy lead to Assad feeling free to start nerve gassing civilians again. Oops. Turns out him being against Islamic State doesn't make him our friend either. It's a horrible nasty mess, but even trying to stay out of it just makes you even more vulnerable to even greater problems in the long run.
  - vkou 9y ago
    And yet, the press has done an about-face on Al Qaeda's, referring to its Syrian branch as 'Al-Nusra, a moderate rebel group.' If I didn't know any better, I'd say that we are being primed for the CIA getting into bed with Islamist terrorists, in order to combat Russian influence in the Middle East. Again.
    - RandVal30141 9y ago
      "And yet, the press has done an about-face on Al Qaeda's, referring to its Syrian branch as 'Al-Nusra, a moderate rebel group." Substantiate your claim. "CIA getting into bed with Islamist terrorists" This is tiresome, just because US govt allies with Muslims that Russia calls terrorists doesn't make them so. In fact, last time I checked Russia works on the ground with Hezbollah, a designated terrorist group. This argument can easily go sideways for people hoisting it up as a mantra.
      - vkou 9y ago
        "The other areas listed are largely dominated by moderate rebel factions or Islamist groups, such as Ahrar al-Sham and the al Qaeda-affiliated Nusra Front." [1] Right. They aren't bad dudes like ISIS, they are just, ah, al-Qaeda's Syrian arm. They are totally on the level. > This is tiresome, just because US govt allies with Muslims that Russia calls terrorists doesn't make them so. That's true. Just because Russia says they are terrorists doesn't make them terrorists. And, perhaps, using car bombs, suicide attacks, assassinations, and forced conscription of child soldiers doesn't make them terrorists either. Strangely enough, all of this seems to be sufficient for the the United States to also designate them to be an islamic terrorist organization. [2] (And then issue diplomatic protests when Russia bombs them.) [1] https://www.wsj.com/articles/putin-seeks-parliaments-approval-for-use-of-force-outside-russia-1443600142 https://www.wsj.com/articles/putin-seeks-parliaments-approva... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Nusra_Front https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Nusra_Front
        RandVal30141 9y ago
        "(And then issue diplomatic protests when Russia bombs them.)" US has literally never complained when Russia has bombed Nusra. People complain when Russia bombs people then calls them ISIS/AQ. Inanimate grain silos? IS oil facilities according to RU MoD. Hospitals? Nusra strongholds according to RU MoD. This is what people complain about. If you want to say otherwise please substantiate your claim.
    - simonh 9y ago
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- RandVal30141 9y ago
  CIA allied with groups that have died fighting al-Qaeda. Just because theft and corruption means material aid given to the groups ended up in AQ's hands doesn't mean CIA allied with al-Qaeda, it shows quite the opposite. SAA goods end up in ISIS's hands by the tons but that doesn't mean they allied with them either. "Too bad the public is made a to be a sucker" Who is the sucker here?

mtgx 9y ago

And then the CIA allied again with alQaeda when fighting Assad. And round and round it goes. Too bad the public is made a to be a sucker every time.

simonh 9y ago
They didn't 'ally with Al Qaeda', they just both happened to be opposed to the same guy while also being opposed to each other. It's a complicated situation out there. Even at the height of the Cold War, sometimes the CIA and KGB would share information of mutual benefit. That didn't mean the CIA was allying with communism. Even Trump has learned this when his 'bombing Syria is the wrong thing to do, what Assad gets up to is non America's business anymore' policy lead to Assad feeling free to start nerve gassing civilians again. Oops. Turns out him being against Islamic State doesn't make him our friend either. It's a horrible nasty mess, but even trying to stay out of it just makes you even more vulnerable to even greater problems in the long run.
- vkou 9y ago
  And yet, the press has done an about-face on Al Qaeda's, referring to its Syrian branch as 'Al-Nusra, a moderate rebel group.' If I didn't know any better, I'd say that we are being primed for the CIA getting into bed with Islamist terrorists, in order to combat Russian influence in the Middle East. Again.
  - RandVal30141 9y ago
    "And yet, the press has done an about-face on Al Qaeda's, referring to its Syrian branch as 'Al-Nusra, a moderate rebel group." Substantiate your claim. "CIA getting into bed with Islamist terrorists" This is tiresome, just because US govt allies with Muslims that Russia calls terrorists doesn't make them so. In fact, last time I checked Russia works on the ground with Hezbollah, a designated terrorist group. This argument can easily go sideways for people hoisting it up as a mantra.
    - vkou 9y ago
      "The other areas listed are largely dominated by moderate rebel factions or Islamist groups, such as Ahrar al-Sham and the al Qaeda-affiliated Nusra Front." [1] Right. They aren't bad dudes like ISIS, they are just, ah, al-Qaeda's Syrian arm. They are totally on the level. > This is tiresome, just because US govt allies with Muslims that Russia calls terrorists doesn't make them so. That's true. Just because Russia says they are terrorists doesn't make them terrorists. And, perhaps, using car bombs, suicide attacks, assassinations, and forced conscription of child soldiers doesn't make them terrorists either. Strangely enough, all of this seems to be sufficient for the the United States to also designate them to be an islamic terrorist organization. [2] (And then issue diplomatic protests when Russia bombs them.) [1] https://www.wsj.com/articles/putin-seeks-parliaments-approval-for-use-of-force-outside-russia-1443600142 https://www.wsj.com/articles/putin-seeks-parliaments-approva... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Nusra_Front https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Nusra_Front
      - RandVal30141 9y ago
        "(And then issue diplomatic protests when Russia bombs them.)" US has literally never complained when Russia has bombed Nusra. People complain when Russia bombs people then calls them ISIS/AQ. Inanimate grain silos? IS oil facilities according to RU MoD. Hospitals? Nusra strongholds according to RU MoD. This is what people complain about. If you want to say otherwise please substantiate your claim.
  - simonh 9y ago
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
RandVal30141 9y ago
CIA allied with groups that have died fighting al-Qaeda. Just because theft and corruption means material aid given to the groups ended up in AQ's hands doesn't mean CIA allied with al-Qaeda, it shows quite the opposite. SAA goods end up in ISIS's hands by the tons but that doesn't mean they allied with them either. "Too bad the public is made a to be a sucker" Who is the sucker here?