"The Obama administration did not initially raise objections when Qatar began shipping arms to opposition groups in Syria, even if it did not offer encouragement, according to current and former administration officials."
"He said that Qatar would not have gone through with the arms shipments if the United States had resisted them, but other current and former administration officials said Washington had little leverage at times over Qatari officials. “They march to their own drummer,” said a former senior State Department official. The White House and State Department declined to comment."
wreckless: The administration has never determined where all of the weapons, paid for by Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, went inside Libya, officials said. Qatar is believed to have shipped by air and sea small arms, including machine guns, automatic rifles, and ammunition, for which it has demanded reimbursement from Libya’s new government. Some of the arms since have been moved from Libya to militants with ties to Al Qaeda in Mali, where radical jihadi factions have imposed <a class="" href='http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/s/sharia_islamic_law/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier' title="More articles about Sharia.">Shariah law</a> in the northern part of the country, the former Defense Department official said. Others have gone to Syria, according to several American and foreign officials and arms traders.
Quote:So he doesn't know whether or not he has any thing. He's just hoping to find something.
Dude are you reading what you are writing?.
You are literally contradicting everything you've been saying!
you cant be this stupid. you can know what you have and it not be ready for release through complicated code that makes it searchable in a database.
the word "duh" has never been more applicable
I read the article. It said Obama administration was arming the rebels in the lybian civil war without the knowledge of the media. And that as they were arming the rebels, the administration began to worry that the weapons were being siphoned off to Isis.
But that is not proof that Obama and Hilary were arming Isis on purpose!!
There's a huge difference, you know...
Quote:you cant be this stupid. you can know what you have and it not be ready for release through complicated code that makes it searchable in a database.
the word "duh" has never been more applicable
As a professional I never make a statement of knowledge unless I can verify it. If he can't verify it, he doesn't have it... He's just hoping.
It's so obvious...
Quote:I read the article. It said Obama administration was arming the rebels in the lybian civil war without the knowledge of the media. And that as they were arming the rebels, the administration began to worry that the weapons were being siphoned off to Isis.
But that is not proof that Obama and Hilary were arming Isis on purpose!!
There's a huge difference, you know...
Then you would have to admit that they are just stupid in not realizing that these weapons shipments would fall into jihadi hands. In truth, they knew who a majority of the rebels were.
They didn't realize who they were arming? Is that it?
Again, they ARE BEING (keep in mind their policies have not changed) wreckless, stupid, or devious.
Quote:As a professional I never make a statement of knowledge unless I can verify it. If he can't verify it, he doesn't have it... He's just hoping.
It's so obvious...
So he's lying. He has nothing? Everything he's been saying is just fake. You honestly believe that?
Quote:Then you would have to admit that they are just stupid in not realizing that these weapons shipments would fall into jihadi hands. In truth, they knew who a majority of the rebels were.
They didn't realize who they were arming? Is that it?
Again, they ARE BEING (keep in mind their policies have not changed) wreckless, stupid, or devious.
Yes. Short sighted, lack of intelligence are descriptors that come to mind.
So now admit that what you are implying is false. The USA did not purposely arm Isis
Quote:Yes. Short sighted, lack of intelligence are descriptors that come to mind.
So now admit that what you are implying is false. The USA did not purposely arm Isis
They have turned a blind eye because Gaddafi was the target (they ignored ISIS) and now Assad being overthrown is now the goal. That I can say for sure. You can say it wasn't on purpose but nobody would be stupid enough to honestly believe that they would not end up in jihadists hands.
Its a fact that they had intelligence about the rise of ISIS but did not consider it a threat. They knew about it. They knew weapons were going to the wrong places and did nothing.
They aren't "short sighted". They have the most experienced military advisors on the planet. They know what's next. They just don't care.
Quote:They have turned a blind eye because Gaddafi was the target (they ignored ISIS) and now Assad being overthrown is now the goal. That I can say for sure. You can say it wasn't on purpose but nobody would be stupid enough to honestly believe that they would not end up in jihadists hands.
Its a fact that they had intelligence about the rise of ISIS but did not consider it a threat. They knew about it. They knew weapons were going to the wrong places and did nothing.
Yeah, the war machine looks to be unstoppable.
Imagine if we took the trilions we spend on war and invested that on our own citizens.
Quote:So he's lying. He has nothing? Everything he's been saying is just fake. You honestly believe that?
His idea and Americans ideas of a big news have not been at the same level of outrage!
He doesn't understand Americans or our politics.
Quote:They didn't arm rebels?
You keep saying that like it was the intent or like our gun culture obsessed country has never done it before. We'll arm anyone. And you correctly identified the target recipients as Syrian rebels and not ISIS.
Quote:You keep saying that like it was the intent or like our gun culture obsessed country has never done it before. We'll arm anyone. And you correctly identified the target recipients as Syrian rebels and not ISIS.
You just said we'll arm anyone, but then say we could not have armed ISIS.
Not what I am saying. You correctly state we tried to arm rebels. Your (legitimate) gripe is some of those got into the hands of ISIS. Have we never made deals like this before?
Quote:Not what I am saying. You correctly state we tried to arm rebels. Your (legitimate) gripe is some of those got into the hands of ISIS. Have we never made deals like this before?
Of course we have, but this situation is unique because you're filtering in weapons shipments through people who have a high likelihood of supporting ISIS. NYTimes even reportted the control over the weapons shipments was so loose they were "handing them out like candy".
Like I said, this idea that our leaders were simply "short sighted" is nonsense. They have intelligence briefings daily. Un-classified pentagon documents detail how we knew ISIS would rise in the case of Qaddafi or Assad being overthrown. They just think, well that's a problem we can deal with later. To them any future terrorist attack is just population control and another reason to start a war.
Quote:Of course we have, but this situation is unique because you're filtering in weapons shipments through people who have a high likelihood of supporting ISIS. NYTimes even reportted the control over the weapons shipments was so loose they were "handing them out like candy".
Like I said, this idea that our leaders were simply "short sighted" is nonsense. They have intelligence briefings daily. Un-classified pentagon documents detail how we knew ISIS would rise in the case of Qaddafi or Assad being overthrown. They just think, well that's a problem we can deal with later. To them any future terrorist attack is just population control and another reason to start a war.
Whether it's Iran-Contra, Fast & Furious or this, it's the same dumb mistake we've been making since the Cold War. All a group or government leader has to say is they are anti whatever and we give them guns. 50 years ago it was anti communist. This instance was anti Assad. All sales are final and we walk away. Then all the recipients need to do is change their tune and we have effectively armed a potential or real enemy. I wish Americans were as consistently upset about this with every instance as you are with this one. This happens over and over again and it's terrible every time. Sorry. This situation is sadly typical.
Quote:Whether it's Iran-Contra, Fast & Furious or this, it's the same dumb mistake we've been making since the Cold War. All a group or government leader has to say is they are anti whatever and we give them guns. 50 years ago it was anti communist. This instance was anti Assad. All sales are final and we walk away. Then all the recipients need to do is change their tune and we have effectively armed a potential or real enemy. I wish Americans were as consistently upset about this with every instance as you are with this one. This happens over and over again and it's terrible every time. Sorry. This situation is sadly typical.
Well said.
To add to this, the root cause is two fold.
1. Our entire economy runs on oil, which now heavily influences our politics.
2. The military industry is now so powerful, and has become so privatized, that the trail is now wagging the dog.
What's worse is that these two industries now compliment each other at a nexus that intersects in the middle East.
This means that until we get off oil and drastically cut military funding these situations that make private military corporations rich while also destabilizing oil rich counties, which benefits the oil corporations, will continue no matter who the President is.
Quote:Actually many recruits are foreign born. I don't know how many are illegal but there are some who serve. Immigrants who serve get on a fast track to become a naturalized citizen.
That makes sense but it sounded like that question was about people here illegally then joining the army would Trump support letting them stay. I didn't think you could join any military branch if your illegally residing anywhere.