CIA Flirts With WWIII While Obama Pretends To Not Arm Syrian Terrorists

Every other day, it seems, we get more information sent to us through the mainstream news that our government, or groups therein, are supporting terrorists in Syria. The latest New York Times piece makes it clear that the Obama Administration’s refusal to directly arm the so-called “rebels” is just window dressing.

“As it evolved, the airlift correlated with shifts in the war within Syria, as rebels drove Syria’s army from territory by the middle of last year. And even as the Obama administration has publicly refused to give more than “nonlethal” aid to the rebels, the involvement of the C.I.A. in the arms shipments — albeit mostly in a consultative role, American officials say — has shown that the United States is more willing to help its Arab allies support the lethal side of the civil war.”

I’d love to know what is being hedged in that word, “mostly.”

As Christians and/or conservatives, the most direct issue is that the US government is directly funding and arming violent killers of Christians (as well as other religious minorities) using accusations against the Assad regime as a flimsy and shameless pretext. All one has to do is look at the people whom we are supporting over Assad to realize how big a lie is behind our humanitarian pretentions. And if that is not enough, go look at Libya right now, or Iraq. Or go look at the human rights record of our “allies” like Saudi Arabia.

Iraq is important, because by bringing a version of “democracy” to that country, we set up a Shiite theocracy complete with the secret police and secret prisons to terrorize opposition. Even apart from the many Iraqi civilians killed, maimed, impoverished, and/or exiled, we paid in the lives of around 4,500 American soldiers (not to mention the many more maimed and injured) in order to bring about a result that is arguably worse than it was before. In terms of declares US political interests, the “victory” in Iraq was a disaster since it took away a major enemy and limitation on Iran, and replaced it with a natural Shiite ally. Our war against the Assad regime is an attempt to undo our massive mistake. If we replace an Iraqi ally with a territory run by Sunni terrorists, we can tell ourselves that we’ve taken away the favor we did for Shiite Iran.

But also significant is how casually we play “chicken” with World War III. Read this paragraph from the NY Times piece, and think about the implications:

“Syrian opposition figures and some American lawmakers and officials have argued that Russian and Iranian arms shipments to support Mr. Assad’s government have made arming the rebels more necessary.”

So there you have it. We are re-inventing the Cold War by this stupid foreign policy. And notice the amazing double standard. If Russia began sending arms to rebels against one of our friendly dictators in Central America, wouldn’t we see it as basic national security to intervene and prop up that dictator? Is there really any symmetry between the United States arming Syrian jihadists and the Russians arming Assad? I doubt very much that Assad’s human rights record is any worse than the Shah’s when we set him up in Iran.

We should not be sponsoring terrorism. Assad means nothing to us. We should not be supporting people who kill Christians. And none of this is worth a conflict with Russia.

[js-disqus]