I guess I'm just not sure. It has worked well enough for the last 60 years, and is only coming apart because Obama seems to be changing long standing policy. I'm just not sure if he's accomplishing what he wants to accomplish.
As far as SA....I expect a shitstorm within a decade. Too much money, too many warring cousins that aren't as bright as they think they are.
Topic: Dylith, Iraq, Kurdistan, and so forth - page 2. (Read 3715 times)
We have pretty strong evidence of this via first hand former combatant testimony, and due to the intensity of our scrutiny of these supply lines in the wake of the Sinjar Document revelations and subsequent investigation.
But AQI aside, there are plenty of other terrorist organizations that Syria has been more than happy to aid even more assertively at one point or another, a couple of which I already mentioned (Fatah al-Islam, the PKK, and Ansar al-Islam), among them are: Hezbollah, Hamas, the Islamic Jihad Organization, The Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Al Saiqa, Amal, and the ANO.
Even during the course of the civil war the Assad Administration has continued to purchase oil from the ISIS which it has been able to do through these long standing internal networks.
Syria has literally funded terrorism against every single one of its neighbors.
I'm sure YOU will disagree on this though: The only policies that can work for the US in the middle east as a whole is back the most ruthless SOBs they can find, regardless of ideology, or stay the hell away from the politics. Trade with whoever is a worthy trading partner, and let Russia and Turkey start to take de facto control of the area. Mixing in the general brouhaha seems to be a disaster in the making. The former is the tried and tested methods of the last 70 years. The latter being what seems to be happening now. But AQI aside, there are plenty of other terrorist organizations that Syria has been more than happy to aid even more assertively at one point or another, a couple of which I already mentioned (Fatah al-Islam, the PKK, and Ansar al-Islam), among them are: Hezbollah, Hamas, the Islamic Jihad Organization, The Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Al Saiqa, Amal, and the ANO.
Even during the course of the civil war the Assad Administration has continued to purchase oil from the ISIS which it has been able to do through these long standing internal networks.
Syria has literally funded terrorism against every single one of its neighbors.
I guess I'm just not sure. It has worked well enough for the last 60 years, and is only coming apart because Obama seems to be changing long standing policy. I'm just not sure if he's accomplishing what he wants to accomplish.
As far as SA....I expect a shitstorm within a decade. Too much money, too many warring cousins that aren't as bright as they think they are.
As far as SA....I expect a shitstorm within a decade. Too much money, too many warring cousins that aren't as bright as they think they are.
We have pretty strong evidence of this via first hand former combatant testimony, and due to the intensity of our scrutiny of these supply lines in the wake of the Sinjar Document revelations and subsequent investigation.
But AQI aside, there are plenty of other terrorist organizations that Syria has been more than happy to aid even more assertively at one point or another, a couple of which I already mentioned (Fatah al-Islam, the PKK, and Ansar al-Islam), among them are: Hezbollah, Hamas, the Islamic Jihad Organization, The Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Al Saiqa, Amal, and the ANO.
Even during the course of the civil war the Assad Administration has continued to purchase oil from the ISIS which it has been able to do through these long standing internal networks.
Syria has literally funded terrorism against every single one of its neighbors.
I'm sure YOU will disagree on this though: The only policies that can work for the US in the middle east as a whole is back the most ruthless SOBs they can find, regardless of ideology, or stay the hell away from the politics. Trade with whoever is a worthy trading partner, and let Russia and Turkey start to take de facto control of the area. Mixing in the general brouhaha seems to be a disaster in the making. The former is the tried and tested methods of the last 70 years. The latter being what seems to be happening now. But AQI aside, there are plenty of other terrorist organizations that Syria has been more than happy to aid even more assertively at one point or another, a couple of which I already mentioned (Fatah al-Islam, the PKK, and Ansar al-Islam), among them are: Hezbollah, Hamas, the Islamic Jihad Organization, The Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Al Saiqa, Amal, and the ANO.
Even during the course of the civil war the Assad Administration has continued to purchase oil from the ISIS which it has been able to do through these long standing internal networks.
Syria has literally funded terrorism against every single one of its neighbors.
We have pretty strong evidence of this via first hand former combatant testimony, and due to the intensity of our scrutiny of these supply lines in the wake of the Sinjar Document revelations and subsequent investigation.
But AQI aside, there are plenty of other terrorist organizations that Syria has been more than happy to aid even more assertively at one point or another, a couple of which I already mentioned (Fatah al-Islam, the PKK, and Ansar al-Islam), among them are: Hezbollah, Hamas, the Islamic Jihad Organization, The Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Al Saiqa, Amal, and the ANO.
Even during the course of the civil war the Assad Administration has continued to purchase oil from the ISIS which it has been able to do through these long standing internal networks.
Syria has literally funded terrorism against every single one of its neighbors.
But AQI aside, there are plenty of other terrorist organizations that Syria has been more than happy to aid even more assertively at one point or another, a couple of which I already mentioned (Fatah al-Islam, the PKK, and Ansar al-Islam), among them are: Hezbollah, Hamas, the Islamic Jihad Organization, The Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Al Saiqa, Amal, and the ANO.
Even during the course of the civil war the Assad Administration has continued to purchase oil from the ISIS which it has been able to do through these long standing internal networks.
Syria has literally funded terrorism against every single one of its neighbors.
Saudi Arabia turned pretty hard against radical Islamist funding in 2003 after they were attacked by such groups. The Al Sauds purged over 2000 of their preachers after that and really cracked down on a lot of its official funding programs. Of course, there are still a lot of Saudi elements that have deep support for Salafi movements so funding still seeps out and Saudi policy is inconsistent in terms of how heavily it cracks down on that based on what is going on internally at the time. The 2009 flooding for example caused such uproar against the Al Sauds that they gave religious sects more freedom and control. It is a back and forth game with Saudi Arabia.
The Gulf states have long supported extremist Syrian rebels and Iraqi terrorism. Only recently have the Saudis changed their strategy, when ISIS actually became an existential threat to them.When you say 'major state sponsor of terrorism in the Middle East', that's a pretty weak statement that doesn't quantify or put anything into perspective.
If Assad supported AQ (which is probably based on flimsy propaganda since Assad is considered 'evil' by the US), then by the same logic, not only did the US support terrorism, but it funded it with training and weapons, which now spilled over into Iraq and has undone most of the 'progress' the US has made Iraq.
Look, you were wrong about Syria, no big deal. No need to try to justify not knowing, you don't specialize in this stuff so who cares?
The most obvious would be in Iran, which has elements in the military that are scarily religious, but just as strong a contingent that has no interest in religion, only money. Even when you talk about Saudi Arabia, you think of the iron control by the House of Saud in the form of the old king and crown prince. The next generation, which will be getting more control in the next few years has vastly different perspectives, and they mostly hate each other and certainly distrust each other. And there are A LOT of them with different agendas and lots of money.
Saudi Arabia turned pretty hard against radical Islamist funding in 2003 after they were attacked by such groups. The Al Sauds purged over 2000 of their preachers after that and really cracked down on a lot of its official funding programs. Of course, there are still a lot of Saudi elements that have deep support for Salafi movements so funding still seeps out and Saudi policy is inconsistent in terms of how heavily it cracks down on that based on what is going on internally at the time. The 2009 flooding for example caused such uproar against the Al Sauds that they gave religious sects more freedom and control. It is a back and forth game with Saudi Arabia.
The Gulf states have long supported extremist Syrian rebels and Iraqi terrorism. Only recently have the Saudis changed their strategy, when ISIS actually became an existential threat to them.When you say 'major state sponsor of terrorism in the Middle East', that's a pretty weak statement that doesn't quantify or put anything into perspective.
If Assad supported AQ (which is probably based on flimsy propaganda since Assad is considered 'evil' by the US), then by the same logic, not only did the US support terrorism, but it funded it with training and weapons, which now spilled over into Iraq and has undone most of the 'progress' the US has made Iraq.
Look, you were wrong about Syria, no big deal. No need to try to justify not knowing, you don't specialize in this stuff so who cares?
Syria also funded Fatah Al Islam in Lebanon which had Al Qaeda links as well. It was essentially an extension of the Syrian intelligence targeting Palestinians who had split with Fatah for use against Lebanon and Israel.
But the predecessors aside, right as Saudi Arabia was recoiling from militant support in 2003, Syria was ramping it up. Pro Saddam militias, insurgents, and AQI depended on Syria as their main resource avenue for materials, money networks, and foreign fighters. While said resources came from all over, it was in Syria that AQI, with the tacit and sometimes active approval and assistance of the Assad Administration established their operational support infrastructure. This is also one of the main reasons why, when they turned against their historic backers in 2011 and 2012, that the ISI was able to expand so rapidly in Syria and become the ISIS, it's because their infrastructure was already there and they could control the flow of foreign fighters into Syria. They also had pre-existing weapons caches inside Syria, had communication infrastructure and networks already pre-established, and had the political and operational contacts needed for the dissemination of foreign material and funding.
Saudi Arabia turned pretty hard against radical Islamist funding in 2003 after they were attacked by such groups. The Al Sauds purged over 2000 of their preachers after that and really cracked down on a lot of its official funding programs. Of course, there are still a lot of Saudi elements that have deep support for Salafi movements so funding still seeps out and Saudi policy is inconsistent in terms of how heavily it cracks down on that based on what is going on internally at the time. The 2009 flooding for example caused such uproar against the Al Sauds that they gave religious sects more freedom and control. It is a back and forth game with Saudi Arabia.
The Gulf states have long supported extremist Syrian rebels and Iraqi terrorism. Only recently have the Saudis changed their strategy, when ISIS actually became an existential threat to them.When you say 'major state sponsor of terrorism in the Middle East', that's a pretty weak statement that doesn't quantify or put anything into perspective.
If Assad supported AQ (which is probably based on flimsy propaganda since Assad is considered 'evil' by the US), then by the same logic, not only did the US support terrorism, but it funded it with training and weapons, which now spilled over into Iraq and has undone most of the 'progress' the US has made Iraq.
Look, you were wrong about Syria, no big deal. No need to try to justify not knowing, you don't specialize in this stuff so who cares?
Saudi Arabia turned pretty hard against radical Islamist funding in 2003 after they were attacked by such groups. The Al Sauds purged over 2000 of their preachers after that and really cracked down on a lot of its official funding programs. Of course, there are still a lot of Saudi elements that have deep support for Salafi movements so funding still seeps out and Saudi policy is inconsistent in terms of how heavily it cracks down on that based on what is going on internally at the time. The 2009 flooding for example caused such uproar against the Al Sauds that they gave religious sects more freedom and control. It is a back and forth game with Saudi Arabia.
The Gulf states have long supported extremist Syrian rebels and Iraqi terrorism. Only recently have the Saudis changed their strategy, when ISIS actually became an existential threat to them.When you say 'major state sponsor of terrorism in the Middle East', that's a pretty weak statement that doesn't quantify or put anything into perspective.
If Assad supported AQ (which is probably based on flimsy propaganda since Assad is considered 'evil' by the US), then by the same logic, not only did the US support terrorism, but it funded it with training and weapons, which now spilled over into Iraq and has undone most of the 'progress' the US has made Iraq.
Look, you were wrong about Syria, no big deal. No need to try to justify not knowing, you don't specialize in this stuff so who cares?
Saudi Arabia turned pretty hard against radical Islamist funding in 2003 after they were attacked by such groups. The Al Sauds purged over 2000 of their preachers after that and really cracked down on a lot of its official funding programs. Of course, there are still a lot of Saudi elements that have deep support for Salafi movements so funding still seeps out and Saudi policy is inconsistent in terms of how heavily it cracks down on that based on what is going on internally at the time. The 2009 flooding for example caused such uproar against the Al Sauds that they gave religious sects more freedom and control. It is a back and forth game with Saudi Arabia.
The Gulf states have long supported extremist Syrian rebels and Iraqi terrorism. Only recently have the Saudis changed their strategy, when ISIS actually became an existential threat to them.When you say 'major state sponsor of terrorism in the Middle East', that's a pretty weak statement that doesn't quantify or put anything into perspective.
If Assad supported AQ (which is probably based on flimsy propaganda since Assad is considered 'evil' by the US), then by the same logic, not only did the US support terrorism, but it funded it with training and weapons, which now spilled over into Iraq and has undone most of the 'progress' the US has made Iraq.
Saudi Arabia turned pretty hard against radical Islamist funding in 2003 after they were attacked by such groups. The Al Sauds purged over 2000 of their preachers after that and really cracked down on a lot of its official funding programs. Of course, there are still a lot of Saudi elements that have deep support for Salafi movements so funding still seeps out and Saudi policy is inconsistent in terms of how heavily it cracks down on that based on what is going on internally at the time. The 2009 flooding for example caused such uproar against the Al Sauds that they gave religious sects more freedom and control. It is a back and forth game with Saudi Arabia.
Quote
It's worth remembering that, unlike the Iraqi government that we actually toppled, the Assad Regime that became embattled in a domestic conflict against its own people actually was a widespread supporter of terrorist organizations, including Al Qaeda in Iraq. In fact, it was probably one of the largest state sponsors of terrorism in the Middle East if you don't count Saudi religious missionary spending. I've been a bit surprised at how nostalgic some people have seem to become for the good old days of enemy dictatorship past.
Source on Assad supporting Al Qaeda in Iraq? It wouldn't make sense for him to do so.Reality check: The Saudis\Wahhabis (US allies) have been the highest source of terror\suicide bombings in Iraq since the US invasion. Lets not try to spin too much here.
The role that many Gulf States like Qatar, the U.A.E. etc play tends to be different than Iran, and Syria. Saudi Arabia was a mix of the two strategies. A lot of money for terrorism is funneled through non-state actors in the Gulf. So the U.A.E. was a big staging point for funds for Al Qaeda Central, and a lot of Gulf Charities can redirect funds to terrorism organizations as well as individual financiers.
Syria's role has been reported for years by the Combating Terrorism Center, IHS Janes, The Institute for the Study of War, the Jamestown Foundation's Terrorism Monitor, SITE intelligence, and the Long War Journal. It isn't really a secret or unknown aspect of the Assad regime's past state sponsoring of terrorism. We've also conducted several raids against AQI stationed in Syria long before the current civil war.
Even now though Assad still funnels money to the ISIS in exchange for oil (as reported by the Terrorism Monitor of the Jamestown Foundation) even as they fight each other.
I'd be happy to find more detailed sources for you when I have more time later, but here is one small article from the Long War Journal detailing one incident: http://www.longwarjournal.org/archiv...an_officia.php
Quote
It's worth remembering that, unlike the Iraqi government that we actually toppled, the Assad Regime that became embattled in a domestic conflict against its own people actually was a widespread supporter of terrorist organizations, including Al Qaeda in Iraq. In fact, it was probably one of the largest state sponsors of terrorism in the Middle East if you don't count Saudi religious missionary spending. I've been a bit surprised at how nostalgic some people have seem to become for the good old days of enemy dictatorship past.
Source on Assad supporting Al Qaeda in Iraq? It wouldn't make sense for him to do so.Reality check: The Saudis\Wahhabis (US allies) have been the highest source of terror\suicide bombings in Iraq since the US invasion. Lets not try to spin too much here.
The role that many Gulf States like Qatar, the U.A.E. etc play tends to be different than Iran, and Syria. Saudi Arabia was a mix of the two strategies. A lot of money for terrorism is funneled through non-state actors in the Gulf. So the U.A.E. was a big staging point for funds for Al Qaeda Central, and a lot of Gulf Charities can redirect funds to terrorism organizations as well as individual financiers.
Syria's role has been reported for years by the Combating Terrorism Center, IHS Janes, The Institute for the Study of War, the Jamestown Foundation's Terrorism Monitor, SITE intelligence, and the Long War Journal. It isn't really a secret or unknown aspect of the Assad regime's past state sponsoring of terrorism. We've also conducted several raids against AQI stationed in Syria long before the current civil war.
Even now though Assad still funnels money to the ISIS in exchange for oil (as reported by the Terrorism Monitor of the Jamestown Foundation) even as they fight each other.
I'd be happy to find more detailed sources for you when I have more time later, but here is one small article from the Long War Journal detailing one incident: http://www.longwarjournal.org/archiv...an_officia.php
Quote
It's worth remembering that, unlike the Iraqi government that we actually toppled, the Assad Regime that became embattled in a domestic conflict against its own people actually was a widespread supporter of terrorist organizations, including Al Qaeda in Iraq. In fact, it was probably one of the largest state sponsors of terrorism in the Middle East if you don't count Saudi religious missionary spending. I've been a bit surprised at how nostalgic some people have seem to become for the good old days of enemy dictatorship past.
Source on Assad supporting Al Qaeda in Iraq? It wouldn't make sense for him to do so.Reality check: The Saudis\Wahhabis (US allies) have been the highest source of terror\suicide bombings in Iraq since the US invasion. Lets not try to spin too much here.
It's worth remembering that, unlike the Iraqi government that we actually toppled, the Assad Regime that became embattled in a domestic conflict against its own people actually was a widespread supporter of terrorist organizations, including Al Qaeda in Iraq. In fact, it was probably one of the largest state sponsors of terrorism in the Middle East if you don't count Saudi religious missionary spending. I've been a bit surprised at how nostalgic some people have seem to become for the good old days of enemy dictatorship past.
It seems many individuals have also become quite nostalgic to proxy wars. Western and Saudi support for anti-Syrian government militias was originally intended to drag Iran/Hezbollah and Russia into a bloody protracted conflict. But in unforeseen circumstances, evidence now indicates Iran and its' foreign warfighting elements are effectively managing this nasty little campaign by intentionally supplying arms against the same rebels they are fighting.Al-Assad's Syrian regime was the most common destination for detainees under our extraordinary rendition program. When Syrian borne jihadists were being wasted by Marine Corps infantry in Al Muwaffiqiyah, Syrian intelligence personnel were busy pulling out the fingernails of AQ and Taliban scumbags on our behalf.
Spearheading Tbilisi, aggression in Ukraine-Crimea, and recent involvement subverting US interests in Iraq; yet you still doubt that the motives for supporting Syrian insurgents are not founded on questionable Russian statecraft? And I think it's safe to say that you and I both know what Syria's primary puppeteer -- Iran/Hezbollah -- are responsible for. We allegedly "didn't initiate the civil war in Syria", but we certainly are prolonging it for a punitive reason.
Unknown if you're vindicating the current situation because Syria was/is "probably one of the largest state sponsors of terrorism in the Middle East", but I hope not. Surely, Pakistan, Iran, and China are more deserving of an uprooting US-armed insurgency if we're citing state sponsored terrorism and gross human rights violations.
It's worth remembering that, unlike the Iraqi government that we actually toppled, the Assad Regime that became embattled in a domestic conflict against its own people actually was a widespread supporter of terrorist organizations, including Al Qaeda in Iraq. In fact, it was probably one of the largest state sponsors of terrorism in the Middle East if you don't count Saudi religious missionary spending. I've been a bit surprised at how nostalgic some people have seem to become for the good old days of enemy dictatorship past.
It seems many individuals have also become quite nostalgic to proxy wars. Western and Saudi support for anti-Syrian government militias was originally intended to drag Iran/Hezbollah and Russia into a bloody protracted conflict. But in unforeseen circumstances, evidence now indicates Iran and its' foreign warfighting elements are effectively managing this nasty little campaign by intentionally supplying arms against the same rebels they are fighting.Al-Assad's Syrian regime was the most common destination for detainees under our extraordinary rendition program. When Syrian borne jihadists were being wasted by Marine Corps infantry in Al Muwaffiqiyah, Syrian intelligence personnel were busy pulling out the fingernails of AQ and Taliban scumbags on our behalf.
It's worth remembering that, unlike the Iraqi government that we actually toppled, the Assad Regime that became embattled in a domestic conflict against its own people actually was a widespread supporter of terrorist organizations, including Al Qaeda in Iraq. In fact, it was probably one of the largest state sponsors of terrorism in the Middle East if you don't count Saudi religious missionary spending. I've been a bit surprised at how nostalgic some people have seem to become for the good old days of enemy dictatorship past.
It seems many individuals have also become quite nostalgic to proxy wars. Western and Saudi support for anti-Syrian government militias was originally intended to drag Iran/Hezbollah and Russia into a bloody protracted conflict. But in unforeseen circumstances, evidence now indicates Iran and its' foreign warfighting elements are effectively managing this nasty little campaign by intentionally supplying arms against the same rebels they are fighting.Al-Assad's Syrian regime was the most common destination for detainees under our extraordinary rendition program. When Syrian borne jihadists were being wasted by Marine Corps infantry in Al Muwaffiqiyah, Syrian intelligence personnel were busy pulling out the fingernails of AQ and Taliban scumbags on our behalf.
The point was that the US government shared a cohesive counter-terrorist and political relationship with Syria even during simultaneous engagements in Iraq with Syrian anti-government irregulars. Current numbers are not difficult to locate. DCIA Michael Hayden asserted in 2007 that "mid-range two hundred" terror suspects were being renditioned to Syria for post-blacksite interrogation. It is not unreasonable to presume that those figures are actually much higher. More importantly, we cannot presume that US-Syria detainee transfer programs stopped due to a new inbound administration. Guantanamo Bay, sir? Even with all the US legislation enacted against Syria (Syria Accountability Act for example) we were wittingly cooperating with Syria. Why did things change so suddenly?
It's worth remembering that, unlike the Iraqi government that we actually toppled, the Assad Regime that became embattled in a domestic conflict against its own people actually was a widespread supporter of terrorist organizations, including Al Qaeda in Iraq. In fact, it was probably one of the largest state sponsors of terrorism in the Middle East if you don't count Saudi religious missionary spending. I've been a bit surprised at how nostalgic some people have seem to become for the good old days of enemy dictatorship past.
It seems many individuals have also become quite nostalgic to proxy wars. Western and Saudi support for anti-Syrian government militias was originally intended to drag Iran/Hezbollah and Russia into a bloody protracted conflict. But in unforeseen circumstances, evidence now indicates Iran and its' foreign warfighting elements are effectively managing this nasty little campaign by intentionally supplying arms against the same rebels they are fighting.Al-Assad's Syrian regime was the most common destination for detainees under our extraordinary rendition program. When Syrian borne jihadists were being wasted by Marine Corps infantry in Al Muwaffiqiyah, Syrian intelligence personnel were busy pulling out the fingernails of AQ and Taliban scumbags on our behalf.
It's worth remembering that, unlike the Iraqi government that we actually toppled, the Assad Regime that became embattled in a domestic conflict against its own people actually was a widespread supporter of terrorist organizations, including Al Qaeda in Iraq. In fact, it was probably one of the largest state sponsors of terrorism in the Middle East if you don't count Saudi religious missionary spending. I've been a bit surprised at how nostalgic some people have seem to become for the good old days of enemy dictatorship past.
It seems many individuals have also become quite nostalgic to proxy wars. Western and Saudi support for anti-Syrian government militias was originally intended to drag Iran/Hezbollah and Russia into a bloody protracted conflict. But in unforeseen circumstances, evidence now indicates Iran and its' foreign warfighting elements are effectively managing this nasty little campaign by intentionally supplying arms against the same rebels they are fighting.Al-Assad's Syrian regime was the most common destination for detainees under our extraordinary rendition program. When Syrian borne jihadists were being wasted by Marine Corps infantry in Al Muwaffiqiyah, Syrian intelligence personnel were busy pulling out the fingernails of AQ and Taliban scumbags on our behalf.
Jump to: