honk honk
I see the US is finally giving up that $500 million project to build (again, again) a rebel opposition. Fwiw, I saw a BBC report about this a month ago when all the rebels could muster was two fat guys jogging around a field. Literally. You’d think it was a parody. Anyway, that particular scam has ended and US tax payers can sleep a little better. Well not really because part of the scam was to divert the weapons supplied:
From a month ago:
/honk honk
Two fat guys 
But did you see this - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khGa49rM6iM
Cameron claims we’re nice and clean and only helping the nice, modern, progressive liberal, secular democrats in Syria.
b-u-u-ut
Yep, two fat guys. This is a copy video of a similar report about those same US trained rebels - it’s pretty informative:
So, given the massive evidence of support for jihadis can we say that the War On Terror is now over ?
It probably just means Obama’s clown car has temporarily run out of fuel.
honk honk
Did I hear that right - they trained 54 rebels, 5 were killed and 12 captured by al Nusra, and the program was deemed a success ? Was this the same al Nusra people British intelligence were working with in the above mentioned ? This democratic, secular, feminist, LGBT friendly group of lovely chaps ?
OK so that’s film of some other bunch…
Looks like the US Taxpayers have managed to swell the Swiss bank accounts of the “syrian opposition”-whatever that is.
Which “above mentioned” are you referring to that says that the UK was supporting al Nusra?
[OK I’ll chop this because I don’t know what your forum policy is on videos and it was severe footage]
There really was a credible opposition way back but - and this is commonplace with US policy - changes in policy by the US (famine/feast) leave the groups hopelessly exposed and feeling like random puppets: on/off/on/off. The US did this so often with the Kurds and pretty well everywhere else. It completely forgets people and just moves pieces around its wank board.
There may have been the usual influence agents at work but yeah the Syrians had genuine grievances against Assad. But for a start the west stopped trusting their own governments after Iraq, barely anybody believes that we can make a success of installing a democracy, hardly anyone believes we don’t have ulterior motives, nobody trusts the news either, so we’re presented with another bunch of promises about making the world a better place with no credible precedent.
Even now main news sites are going on about Russia bombing Assad’s opposition without saying exactly which part of the opposition - maybe because they know nobody in the west supports the salafists.
Truly tragic if you’re just a Syrian who wanted a more progressive life to live.
Took them a year to figure out they were going to be training nazis in Ukraine, and only bothered about it because a black senator found out.
Swedish guy. OK maybe he was a NATO agent. Maybe not.
I’m not being snarky, I don’t know what post/cite you’re talking about. There’s 372 posts in the thread – does every exchange between us have to be this difficult?
“Even now main news sites are going on about Russia bombing Assad’s opposition without saying exactly which part of the opposition - maybe because they know nobody in the west supports the salafists.” - I mean the people, not the governments or press. generally speaking.
So anyway I guess it’s terror attacks on Russia soon ? Chechens etc. ?
So that article convinces you that the British intelligence service supports al-Zawarahi’s affiliate in Syria? As in, it is official UK government policy to support Al Qaeda?
You saved your snark until now ?
OK go on, what’s the unconvincing bit ? why have they got it all wrong ? You know perfectly well there’s official and unofficial in this world. You’re not going to drag me round this are you ?
No worries. Glad to have cleared it up.
Do you know the difference between snark and disagreement? Is it possible to have a civil debate?
The allegation that the British government has an official policy to support the official Al Qaeda affiliate in Syria is an extraordinary claim. I’m quite simply asking you if you believe that the article and the allegations therein constitute the extraordinary evidence that is generally expected to prove an extraordinary claim.
The US spent the better part of a decade and tens of billions of dollars building up the Iraqi army yet that wasn’t enough to stop the rise of ISIS. Why would things have turned out any better in Syria if we had started arming the “credible opposition” a few years earlier?