Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Saturday, April 26, 2014

After years of grinding civil war, the Syrian battlefield has seen a wide array of weapons employed by the rebel factions fighting Assad. From antiquated World War II rifles to homemade mortars, the rebels have used everything at their disposal, but recently the appearance of American anti-tank weapons in the northern town of Heesh has many wondering if the United States is finally about to supply the rebels with the heavy weapons, including shoulder-fired MANPADs, needed to counter Assad's mechanized and airborne forces.

Advertisement

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Advertisement

Subscriptions

Author Info

danni

 

Advertisement

MORE STORIES

 

Advertisement

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

This is my point exactly. The 'popular' insurgency against anti-American leaders in Syria, Libya, Egypt (Morsi), etc., are fully backed and funded by the CIA and the US government. Likewise, the pro-US leaders in Ukraine who helped spark the incursion by Russian into Crimea were similarly fully backed and funded by US. Wake up America, we are not cheerleaders passively sitting on the sidelines rooting on "popular" insurgencies.

#1 | Posted by moder8 at 2014-04-25 12:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

In a discussion we had a day or two ago I suggested we should have given the Syrian rebels the weapons they begged us for. Now, apparently, we are but I have to ask, wouldn't it have been smarter to have given them to them when they were begging for them. Now, it is questionable if it will do any good. Something we should consider with Ukraine, especially considering the Russians are the supplier of arms to Assad so the Syrian conflict is another way Obama is now making life a little more difficult for Putin.

#2 | Posted by danni at 2014-04-25 01:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

Danni, not to be a ----- or anything, but wake up. We have been giving them weapons all along. The only thing that has changed is now it is being openly reported.
On a side note, I have good friend who is from Homs in Syria. The family is pro-Assad. From day 1 they have stated that it is general knowledge throughout Syria that the US is the main backer of the insurgency.

#3 | Posted by moder8 at 2014-04-25 01:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

Our meddling in the region has been such a positive for us over the years, I can see why the Obama admin would feel the need to get involved agains the wishes of the public.

#4 | Posted by Sully at 2014-04-25 01:06 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 2

"Danni, not to be a ----- or anything, but wake up. We have been giving them weapons all along. The only thing that has changed is now it is being openly reported. "

Only light weapons, not the weapons that can take out tanks and helicopters. Now, apparently, we are.

#5 | Posted by danni at 2014-04-25 01:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

"From day 1 they have stated that it is general knowledge throughout Syria that the US is the main backer of the insurgency."

We know one thing for positive, Putin is the backer of Assad and Assad is a butcher. As I recall the Syrians were protesting in the streets when Assads troops started shooting them down. This did not start out as a violent revolution but the people were sick of being ruled by the Assad family.

#6 | Posted by danni at 2014-04-25 01:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

#4 | Posted by Sully at 2014-04-25 01:06 PM | Reply | Flag

Turtletopian that can't spare a nickel.

#7 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-04-25 01:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

It's been posted a hundred times but, for the life of me I can't figure out how anyone thinks this is good. I can understand in the 80's b/c there wasn't a track record for things going bad when you arm religous nut jobs. Plus we thought we would stick it to the Russians the way they did us in Vietnam. The rebels want a Islamic state and if the rebels win they will get one. They are killing Christians left and right.

#8 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-04-25 01:33 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

"Obama is now making life a little more difficult for Putin."

You seem more concerned with getting back at Putin for embarrassing Obama than doing the smart thing.

#9 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-04-25 01:34 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

"You seem more concerned with getting back at Putin for embarrassing Obama than doing the smart thing."

Oh, not that Putin is potentially starting a huge war. If left alone he is going to invade much more than just Ukraine and, as I've mentioned before, I personally know people who are at risk in Ukraine. One in particular is an 18 year old boy who was readying for college but who is now being called every day by the military asking him to come down and enlist. I do not want him to be in a war but if he is going to be then I want them to have all the weapons they need. That boy was in my home here in the US only a few months ago, he is an exceptionally nice young guy, very, very smart. He knows more about our Civil War than I do. This is personal to me, it isn't about Obama. Obama is frustrating me with his unwillingness to arm the Ukrainians and they have been also begging us to.

#10 | Posted by danni at 2014-04-25 01:39 PM | Reply | Flag:

- embarrassing Obama

What a stupid rwing meme.

Obama and Vlad had talked about getting rid of chemical weapons in Syria months before the proposal.

#11 | Posted by Corky at 2014-04-25 01:42 PM | Reply | Flag:

-We have been giving them weapons all along.

Nonsense. Nothing on this scale, although they have begged us to for years.

Had we done this a couple of years ago rather than been afraid of our own isolationist blow-back, you know, people who now think that every ME occurrence is Iraq all over again,... then AQ, which was never popular in Syria, would not have attained a strong foothold, and Assad might be out of power by now.

Another heartfelt, "Thank You!" to GW for making reasonable aid to states that want to overthrow their dictators into a pants-wetting episode for formerly rational people who were traumatized into inaction by his Great Iraqi Adventure.

#12 | Posted by Corky at 2014-04-25 01:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

Best of luck to him Danni. He shouldn't join up b/c if Russia decided they could crush Ukraine's army in a few days.

#13 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-04-25 02:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

"....we are not cheerleaders.."

oh come on...some of us here are great cheerleaders.

#14 | Posted by eberly at 2014-04-25 02:05 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

Obama and Vlad had talked about getting rid of chemical weapons in Syria months before the proposal.

#11 | Posted by Corky at 2014-04-25 01:42 PM | Reply | Flag:

Sure they were.

#15 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-04-25 02:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

Only thing is Corky, it isn't only the right that is using the meme, many disappointed liberals can't forgive Obama for letting them down in several ways such as not prosecuting Wall St. bankers, NSA spying, etc.
Those things are true but they don't change the situation overseas and, like him or not, he is the President and I think he needs to take stronger action, but not American troops on the ground though.
I do wonder though what would have happened if we had just flown in 50,000 troops without saying anything, the same way Putin moves his troops around. Then just sit there. What would Putin have done, started a real war with the U.S.?

#16 | Posted by danni at 2014-04-25 02:07 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Iraq has nothing to do with me thinking that arming jihadist is a bad idea. I go back to arming them in the 80's.

#17 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-04-25 02:14 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

"While the proposal appeared to come out of the blue when Russia made it public on Monday after a seemingly offhand comment by Secretary of State John Kerry, it had actually grown out of conversations between Mr. Obama and Mr. Putin going back more than a year."

www.nytimes.com

#20 | Posted by Corky at 2014-04-25 02:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

Supplying heavy weapons is part of the peace process.

#21 | Posted by Derek_Wildstar at 2014-04-25 03:18 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

If they're giving them MANPAD's, then this country has sunk to an all time low and it should be easily evident to anyone with 2 brain cells, that we don't want this war in Syria to end unless its on their terms. Who cares how many thousands more die, whatever it takes.

#22 | Posted by daniel_3 at 2014-04-25 03:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

It's been posted a hundred times but, for the life of me I can't figure out how anyone thinks this is good.

Throwing out tyrants can be good or bad. Depends on whether the people get a representative government.

#23 | Posted by rcade at 2014-04-25 04:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Throwing out tyrants can be good or bad. Depends on whether the people get a representative government."

Not throwing out tyrants can only be bad; so for any chance of a better life these people had no choice but to first throw out the tyrant, if America stands for anything, we should stand for helping them accomplish that by giving them the tools they need.

#24 | Posted by danni at 2014-04-25 08:25 PM | Reply | Flag:

"In a discussion we had a day or two ago I suggested we should have given the Syrian rebels the weapons they begged us for."

It's very tempting, Danni. But remember the alleged 'Arab Spring'?
We could be giving weapons to much worse people.
I say stay out of it all and let them kill one another. It's not our business.

#25 | Posted by Diablo at 2014-04-26 01:06 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

This is my point exactly. The 'popular' insurgency against anti-American leaders in Syria, Libya, Egypt (Morsi), etc., are fully backed and funded by the CIA and the US government. Likewise, the pro-US leaders in Ukraine who helped spark the incursion by Russian into Crimea were similarly fully backed and funded by US. Wake up America, we are not cheerleaders passively sitting on the sidelines rooting on "popular" insurgencies.

----------

But when the Russians do it it is terrorism.

Hope and change imbeciles.

#26 | Posted by Shawn at 2014-04-26 01:09 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

#26

Vlad loves him some apologists.

#27 | Posted by Corky at 2014-04-26 03:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Likewise, the pro-US leaders in Ukraine who helped spark the incursion by Russian into Crimea were similarly fully backed and funded by US."

And gee, I thought the soldiers there without insignia on their uniforms were Russians, to find out now that they were CIA....boy that CIA is nothing short of amazing.

#28 | Posted by danni at 2014-04-26 05:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

And gee, I thought the soldiers there without insignia on their uniforms were Russians, to find out now that they were CIA....boy that CIA is nothing short of amazing.

#28 | POSTED BY DANNI AT 2014-04-26 05:28 PM | FLAG:

Did you just miss his point or intentionally distort it to fit your US-interventionist view of the situation?

American CIA directed NGOs backed the Maidan's coup, having been at it for 10 years. Us bankrolling revolution in Kiev sent all the Berkut home, whom were mostly pro-Russians from Crimea, opening the door for Russia's land grab. One came before the other. Russian troops didn't show up until we bankrolled the actions that made it possible.

#29 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2014-04-27 09:07 AM | Reply | Flag:

#24 | Posted by danni

What about Iraq? Oh wait, Iraq has oil, therefor it was an act of evil, I understand now.

#30 | Posted by mariosanchez at 2014-04-28 12:13 AM | Reply | Flag:

Advertisement

Post a comment

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2014 World Readable

 

Advertisement

Drudge Retort