« | »

Obama Will Send Military Aid To Syrian ‘Rebels’

From an unquestioning Associated Press:

Obama steps up military aid to Syrian rebels

By JULIE PACE and LOLITA C. BALDOR | June 14, 2013

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama’s decision to authorize lethal aid to Syrian rebels marks a deepening of U.S. involvement in the two-year civil war. But U.S. officials are still grappling with what type and how much weaponry to send the opposition forces and how to ensure it stays out of the hands of extremists battling for control of Syria.

Huh? If they aid the rebels, they will be putting weapons in the hands of the extremists.

U.S. officials confirmed Obama’s authorization Thursday after the White House announced it had conclusive evidence that Syrian President Bashar Assad’s regime used chemical weapons against opposition forces…

So we are going to war based on the suppositions of our intelligence agencies? That sounds familiar. But I seem to recall Obama criticizing a former President for doing that.

By the way, Bush got Congress’s approval. (As well as the UN’s.) Is Obama going to do that? Of course not.

While a small percentage of the 93,000 people reportedly killed in Syria are said to have died from chemical weapons — U.S. intelligence puts the number at 100 to 150 — the White House views the deployment of the deadly agents as a flouting of international norms…

So we are the world’s policemen, despite Obama’s claims to the contrary?

The Obama administration could give the rebels a range of weapons, including small arms, assault rifles, shoulder-fired remote-propelled grenades and other anti-tank missiles…

Obama’s opposition to sending American troops into Syria makes it less likely the U.S. will provide sophisticated arms or anti-aircraft weapons that would require large-scale training.

And how long will it be before they are turned upon us?

Administration officials are also worried about high-powered weapons ending up in the hands of terrorist groups. Hezbollah fighters are among those backing Assad’s armed forces, and al-Qaida-linked extremists back the rebellion…

Why isn’t the best case here to just let them kill each other, and let Allah sort them out? In fact, this war would probably end a lot sooner and with far fewer people killed if we did not get involved.

Meanwhile, just last month the UN was telling us that it was the rebels who were using Sarin gas.

From Reuters:

U.N. has testimony that Syrian rebels used sarin gas: investigator

By Stephanie Nebehay | May 5, 2013

GENEVA (Reuters) – U.N. human rights investigators have gathered testimony from casualties of Syria’s civil war and medical staff indicating that rebel forces have used the nerve agent sarin, one of the lead investigators said on Sunday.

The United Nations independent commission of inquiry on Syria has not yet seen evidence of government forces having used chemical weapons, which are banned under international law, said commission member Carla Del Ponte..

We thought Obama always believed the UN.

Anyway, we would probably all be better off if Obama would stick to eating dogs instead of wagging them.

This article was posted by Steve Gilbert on Friday, June 14th, 2013. Comments are currently closed.

11 Responses to “Obama Will Send Military Aid To Syrian ‘Rebels’”

  1. Rusty Shackleford

    Obama’s treading on very thin ground. As I said many years ago, he’s gonna p*ss EVERYBODY off because that’s who he is, a troublemaker. He has no allies, no friends, except when it’s a matter of convenience.

    Remember, his first goal is to do harm to this nation and the more he gets away with things, and the media and his sycophants let him, the farther he will try to reach…and overreach.

    It really doesn’t matter why he’s sending US troops to Syria, all that matters to him is that it will get more of them killed, while he claims to be against it. In spite of the obvious hazard and risk to our soldiers, I am fascinated to hear his spin on this and if the media and the LIV’s buy it or not. They most likely will, and yet another case of hypocrisy between their assessment of Bush vs. the anointed one will become very obvious. ‘

    But they don’t care and Obama will sit there, smirk and say, “You can’t do NUTTIN’ cuz I’m black.”

    Short of launching a nuke, which I haven’t ruled out yet that he might do, this clown is untouchable. The dems are all saying, “Why didn’t we think of this before?”

    Then there’s the subject of false indignation. What I mean by that is they think the Bush administration was spying on Americans and so, the national socialists undertook to do it first out of spite, then out of the need to run a police-state which is what statists do and, judging by the lack of outrage by republicans, I’m thinking we’re in really big trouble—soviet style.

    Then, as described by Rush, the blamer-in-chief trots out another speech about how he’s against all this, while he is masterminding or endorsing all the nefarious activity behind the scenes. Again, he needn’t issue orders for people to do the evil deeds; They know what to do and they do it.

    I would like to be optimistic and say that he’s really gonna step in it but he has already and the media doesn’t care. He’s perfect. He’s gifted, he’s —–black. As predicted the little lover’s spat over captain twit-noid spying on the news services is over.

    We have become disastrously dysfunctional as a nation. That is, with such a large segment of the population being so willfully blind to the obvious, even when they “do what Bush did” (with hair on it), they say….”Hey…it’s the GOVERNMENT….why are you so against it?”

    And there is the impasse. When statists are running the government and such a large portion of the nation endorses it, we are officially screwed. It both saddens and amazes me that 47% of the nation happily hands over their freedom to such people. It’s been one of the biggest ongoing scams for over a century. It has now reached critical mass. The only thing that makes me remotely optimistic is that the statists will screw up royally and so big that they can’t hide it or alter the facts to suit their agenda.

    National socialists forget that the democrats got us into Vietnam. The protests, the anger, the vitriol was aimed squarely at LBJ. But it wasn’t really about Vietnam. It was about high school grads having to go there because of the draft. When the draft ended (Richard Nixon), the protests stopped instantly.

    So….there will be no protests about troops in Syria because 1) a democrat’s doing it, 2) there is no draft so “soldiers deserve to die” which is paraphrasing something that that a-hole president said some years ago and 3) It all fits with his agenda to cost more money, spend more life and damage the US even more.

    Think of a petulant child. Then think about how they would act if allowed to have the power needed to show his anger.

    Obama’s tantrum is ongoing and it would seem that the media and the other statists are just as angry at this nation for some heretofore unknown reason but it doesn’t matter as they conduct the equivalent of rioting, burning and looting.

    Perhaps….perhaps….the last 50 years has fostered a very spoiled collective child and they want it THEIR WAY and NOW. Yet, they are finding it doesn’t really work that way. Answer? To keep yelling, stamping their feet and pointing fingers. And when all that falls to crap? More loudly, more feet-stamping, more finger pointing.

    No solutions, only more problems. It’s the statist way.

    I don’t really think it’ll be very long before there’s a mass turning of the government to imprison people who disagree with them. It’s what statists do and have done for centuries. They will figure out a way and they will carry it out. Half the population will think it a good idea.

    Welcome to 1933 Germany everyone.

  2. canary

    Steve/ “So we are going to war based on the suppositions of our intelligence agencies? That sounds familiar. But I seem to recall Obama criticizing a former President for doing that.

    By the way, Bush got Congress’s approval. (As well as the UN’s.) Is Obama going to do that? Of course not.”

    Steve really nailed it. It’s 2013 and with U.S. Drones flying over Syria we should see it with our own eyes. Won’t breech national security.

    The US already sent U.S. Troops, Patriot Missiles, Drones, and more to fight Syria from Turkey’s border.

    So, now they will take U.S. citizen guns and hand them to bad guys you can’t tell apart. Hezbollah aiding Syria to fight rebels and Al-Qaeda. In the end it will be terrorists running Syria.

    CNN: U.S. troops arrive in Turkey; rebels battle for airport in Syria
    By Ben Brumfield – Jan 4 2013
    http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/04/.....-civil-war

    World War Arab Spring III

  3. rockhard10

    George Bush declared war in Iraq and Afghanistan,sending boots on the ground.Obama recieved approval for the no fly zone in Libya,however he is sending light arms, and material goods as well as communication devices to the rebels,so they can maintain their toehold in Aleppo.No U’S’ FORCES WILL BE USED,SO,AS THE CONSTITUTION CLEARLY ALLOWS,HE NEEDS NO CONGRESSIONAL SUPPORT.This is why Obama crushed the GOP in 2 seperate elections,because the people realize what the right has become.They hate Obama for crushing them twice electorally,for being a black man,and a constitutional scholar,which the author of this piece is not.George Bush declared,after failing to find a single WMD,in Iraq,that we still took out a bad man, who gassed the Kurds, AND MURDERED MANY OF HIS OWN PEOPLE,ALBEIT NOT IN A CIVIL WAR.You cannot have it both ways.Small arms are needed, to help the Syrians maintain their toe hold in Aleppo,with the hopes of forcing Assad to a negotiating table..Obama has refused to become involved,until not only our intel told him Assad was gassing ther opposition,but also European intel as well,which is a big difference from Iraq.Stop the hypocrisy.Your propaganda could not fool a 5 year old child.Obama is doing the right thing,and the GOP,except those tied at the hip to arms manufactuters,are just doing more of their attacking of.Obama for anything,and everything.He needs congressional approval only if a no fly zone is ordered,and that is a constitutional FACT.Despite your incessant attacks and criticisms.Lets remember,Obama won with a considerable mandate,and has the right to act in the United Staes best interests,as well as the Worlds.

  4. rockhard10

    George Bush declared war in Iraq and Afghanistan,sending boots on the ground.Obama recieved approval for the no fly zone in Libya,however he is sending light arms, and material goods as well as communication devices to the rebels,so they can maintain their toehold in Aleppo.No U’S’ FORCES WILL BE USED,SO,AS THE CONSTITUTION CLEARLY ALLOWS,HE NEEDS NO CONGRESSIONAL SUPPORT.This is why Obama crushed the GOP in 2 seperate elections,because the people realize what the right has become.They hate Obama for crushing them twice electorally,for being a black man,and a constitutional scholar,which the author of this piece is not.George Bush declared,after failing to find a single WMD,in Iraq,that we still took out a bad man, who gassed the Kurds, AND MURDERED MANY OF HIS OWN PEOPLE,ALBEIT NOT IN A CIVIL WAR.You cannot have it both ways.Small arms are needed, to help the Syrians maintain their toe hold in Aleppo,with the hopes of forcing Assad to a negotiating table..Obama has refused to become involved,until not only our intel told him Assad was gassing ther opposition,but also European intel as well,which is a big difference from Iraq.Stop the hypocrisy.Your propaganda could not fool a 5 year old child.Obama is doing the right thing,and the GOP,except those tied at the hip to arms manufactuters,are just doing more of their attacking of.Obama for anything,and everything.He needs congressional approval only if a no fly zone is ordered,and that is a constitutional FACT.Despite your incessant attacks and criticisms.Lets remember,Obama won with a considerable mandate,and has the right to act in the United Staes best interests,as well as the Worlds.The vast majority of Syrians are good people,and approve of a secular Democracy,by the way.

  5. rockhard10

    It appears you do not approve of dissenting opinions.You only print opinions that jive with yours,Word press is a bunch of fascists masking as a legitimate debating sight.You are fucking fascists jerk offs

  6. AcornsRNutz

    Ok rock hard, some debating then. First go look up the definition of fascist. I’ll wait. Ok that describe the current regime quick quite well huh? Next as regards your boots the deck comment (and I still wear pair ). Who do the you think will deliver those small arms and teach the “rebels” to use them? Unicef? Secondly though no “wmds” we’re found you cannocannot prove a negative and that whole country is a munitions dump. Also

  7. AcornsRNutz

    I ant debate any more since my fascist kindle is a POS and impossible to type but I’ll add more from a real computer sometime if you ever come back, which I doubt. Real quick though if you were in possession of “wmds” (a term I despise since they caused plenty of destruction with what they did have I promise) and you had months of advance warning and a guy from a country who was opposed to war there was the only one looking for them, wouldn’t you move them like to a neighboring country? Like, to the one that is now using sarin gas perhaps? Just the tip of the iceberg buddy.

  8. Liberals Demise

    Ok crockhard10, you can remove yo’ sef from the MONICA LEWINSKY cubby hole under
    DingleBarrys’ desk. Obama winning a mandate is laughable. Everything this turd has touched
    Has been a disaster. One look at his den of thieves and liars confirms he is the Ringmaster of
    the so called “3 ring circus” he tagged the GOP with. Actually. …… he is a 3rd world clown and he’s proved it
    time after time. So go toot your horns and bark for fish else where sealboy.
    Oh well, back to class “Fucking Fascist 101″.


« Front Page | To Top
« | »