Top | Newest First | Oldest First
TheOneyouwerewarnedabout · 41-45, MVIP
Since Reagan and ollie it seems the same game plan is to give weapons and support to the little bad guy, in hope they go fight the big bad guy... But it never works out.. But let's see if the next attemp is any different.. *grabs popcorn*
View 5 more replies »
WoodyAq · M
@paresseux: some of regime forces are just terrorists loyal to Assad. It's a confused situation, and it's difficult ... but not impossible.
paresseux · 26-30, M
@WoodyAq: Thats fair.
WoodyAq · M
@paresseux: btw, the problem with US funding in Afghanistan was that they let Pakistan decide who got the funds. Not funding Syrian rebels has practically guaranteed that terrorists have been better armed, better paid and better recruiters. In a sense, the US has supported ISIS by not supporting the people fighting ISIS. Spoiler alert: Assad and the Russians aren't fighting ISIS.
paresseux · 26-30, M
The Pentagon just got caught paying >400M to groups to make fake terrorist videos, which isn't exactly the same, but it's still ethically dubious. We have funded groups who have turned out to be terrorists, maybe not deliberately, but the result was the same nonetheless. The US has given funding and weapons to Bin Laden and Al Quaeda. I have no doubt many weapons in the hands of Syrian terrorists today were weapons we gave them.
WoodyAq · M
Yes. Enemy of my enemy and all that. It doesn't fund more than any other country though.
Unlearn · 41-45, M
Only when it's convenient...
tynamite · 31-35, M
They funded ISIS
WoodyAq · M
No, they didn't. Assad did, though.
Aprism · F
Brave, very brave.