4 ms·

> The same documents confirm the CIA has been arming Al Qaeda in Syria. That's not true. The U.S. has never armed al Qaeda in Syria (al Nusra). The U.S. has bo

> The same documents confirm the CIA has been arming Al Qaeda in Syria. That's not true. The U.S. has never armed al Qaeda in Syria (al Nusra). The U.S. has bombed them[1], and cut off arms to other groups when it looked like there was a possibility of them getting into al Qaeda's/al Nusra's hands[2]. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/20/world/middleeast/us-airstrike-al-qaeda-syria.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/20/world/middleeast/us-airst... [2] http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-rebels/exclusive-cia-backed-aid-for-syrian-rebels-frozen-after-islamist-attack-sources-idUSKBN1601BD http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-rebel...

trhway 9y ago
> The U.S. has bombed them Did you mean "airdropped weapons and munitions"? Probably they put "bombed" in the official expense reports as a shorter synonym. CIA has been supporting Al Qaeda and other Sunni Saudi proxies for the last 3 decades at least, and i don't see what can realistically happen that would make CIA stop now. If anything, given current Shia position - formed Shia belt from Lebanon to Iran (thus in particular killing any chances for Saudi pipelines to Europe) plus Yemen (where US openly turns blind eye to religion based genocide by Saudis) and Russia playing on Shia side (Russia no specific religious prefs here, they support Shia only because US chose Sunni) - the support would probably be increasing.
gebruikersnaam 9y ago
> The U.S. has never armed al Qaeda in Syria (al Nusra). That's not true[1]. The USAF might have bombed them, the CIA certainly supported them. The war between the CIA and DoD is described here [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Division_(Syrian_rebel_group) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Division_(Syrian_rebe... [2] http://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-cia-pentagon-isis-20160327-story.html http://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-cia-pentagon-i...
- Chathamization 9y ago
  From your first link: > The group received funding, including salaries for its fighters, from the CIA, before being cut off in December 2014 following battlefield reversals at the hands of the al-Nusra Front. > In mid-2015 the group renewed cooperation with the al-Nusra Front as part of the Army of Conquest during the northwestern Syria offensive (April–June 2015). The CIA having supported groups that have at times worked with al Qaeda in Syria (and at times fought against them) is quite different from the CIA arming al Qaeda. The only mention of al Qaeda/al Nusra in your second link is this: > President Obama this month authorized a new Pentagon plan to train and arm Syrian rebel fighters, relaunching a program that was suspended in the fall after a string of embarrassing setbacks which included recruits being ambushed and handing over much of their U.S.-issued ammunition and trucks to an Al Qaeda affiliate.
  - gebruikersnaam 9y ago
    "In October 2012, U.S. officials acknowledged off the record for the first time to the New York Times that “most” of the arms that had been shipped to armed opposition groups in Syria with U.S. logistical assistance during the previous year had gone to “hardline Islamic jihadists”— obviously meaning al Qaeda’s Syrian franchise, al Nusra." http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-america-armed-terrorists-in-syria/ http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-america-...
    - Chathamization 9y ago
      The New York Times article they're using as their source doesn't say that, however. The article is also from 2012, and not dealing with the CIA's later program to arm rebels (which I believe started in 2013): > Most of the arms shipped at the behest of Saudi Arabia and Qatar to supply Syrian rebel groups fighting the government of Bashar al-Assad are going to hard-line Islamic jihadists, and not the more secular opposition groups that the West wants to bolster, according to American officials and Middle Eastern diplomats. ... > The United States is not sending arms directly to the Syrian opposition. Instead, it is providing intelligence and other support for shipments of secondhand light weapons like rifles and grenades into Syria, mainly orchestrated from Saudi Arabia and Qatar. The reports indicate that the shipments organized from Qatar, in particular, are largely going to hard-line Islamists. The only mention of al Qaeda in the New York Times article is this: > The disorganization is strengthening the hand of Islamic extremist groups in Syria, some with ties or affiliations with Al Qaeda, he said: “The longer this goes on, the more likely those groups will gain strength.”

trhway 9y ago

> The U.S. has bombed them Did you mean "airdropped weapons and munitions"? Probably they put "bombed" in the official expense reports as a shorter synonym. CIA has been supporting Al Qaeda and other Sunni Saudi proxies for the last 3 decades at least, and i don't see what can realistically happen that would make CIA stop now. If anything, given current Shia position - formed Shia belt from Lebanon to Iran (thus in particular killing any chances for Saudi pipelines to Europe) plus Yemen (where US openly turns blind eye to religion based genocide by Saudis) and Russia playing on Shia side (Russia no specific religious prefs here, they support Shia only because US chose Sunni) - the support would probably be increasing.

gebruikersnaam 9y ago

> The U.S. has never armed al Qaeda in Syria (al Nusra). That's not true[1]. The USAF might have bombed them, the CIA certainly supported them. The war between the CIA and DoD is described here [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Division_(Syrian_rebel_group) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Division_(Syrian_rebe... [2] http://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-cia-pentagon-isis-20160327-story.html http://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-cia-pentagon-i...

Chathamization 9y ago
From your first link: > The group received funding, including salaries for its fighters, from the CIA, before being cut off in December 2014 following battlefield reversals at the hands of the al-Nusra Front. > In mid-2015 the group renewed cooperation with the al-Nusra Front as part of the Army of Conquest during the northwestern Syria offensive (April–June 2015). The CIA having supported groups that have at times worked with al Qaeda in Syria (and at times fought against them) is quite different from the CIA arming al Qaeda. The only mention of al Qaeda/al Nusra in your second link is this: > President Obama this month authorized a new Pentagon plan to train and arm Syrian rebel fighters, relaunching a program that was suspended in the fall after a string of embarrassing setbacks which included recruits being ambushed and handing over much of their U.S.-issued ammunition and trucks to an Al Qaeda affiliate.
- gebruikersnaam 9y ago
  "In October 2012, U.S. officials acknowledged off the record for the first time to the New York Times that “most” of the arms that had been shipped to armed opposition groups in Syria with U.S. logistical assistance during the previous year had gone to “hardline Islamic jihadists”— obviously meaning al Qaeda’s Syrian franchise, al Nusra." http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-america-armed-terrorists-in-syria/ http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-america-...
  - Chathamization 9y ago
    The New York Times article they're using as their source doesn't say that, however. The article is also from 2012, and not dealing with the CIA's later program to arm rebels (which I believe started in 2013): > Most of the arms shipped at the behest of Saudi Arabia and Qatar to supply Syrian rebel groups fighting the government of Bashar al-Assad are going to hard-line Islamic jihadists, and not the more secular opposition groups that the West wants to bolster, according to American officials and Middle Eastern diplomats. ... > The United States is not sending arms directly to the Syrian opposition. Instead, it is providing intelligence and other support for shipments of secondhand light weapons like rifles and grenades into Syria, mainly orchestrated from Saudi Arabia and Qatar. The reports indicate that the shipments organized from Qatar, in particular, are largely going to hard-line Islamists. The only mention of al Qaeda in the New York Times article is this: > The disorganization is strengthening the hand of Islamic extremist groups in Syria, some with ties or affiliations with Al Qaeda, he said: “The longer this goes on, the more likely those groups will gain strength.”