New York Times: Trump Ends Covert Aid to Syrian Rebels Trying to Topple Assad
President Trump has ended the clandestine American program to provide arms and supplies to Syrian rebel groups, American officials said, a recognition that the effort was failing and that the administration has given up hope of helping to topple the government of President Bashar al-Assad.
The decision came more than a month ago, the officials said, by which time the effort to deliver the arms had slowed to a trickle.
It was never publicly announced, just as the beginnings of the program four years ago were officially a secret, authorized by President Barack Obama through a “finding” that permitted the C.I.A. to conduct a deniable program. News of the troublesome program soon leaked out.
Read more ....
WNU Editor: This secret CIA program was an unmitigated disaster. Radical jihadists benefited from it. The misery and the war just exploded .... resulting in the refugee disaster that we are still facing today. And in the war against ISIS .... the only group that have proven their worth are the Kurds .... and not the Syrian rebel groups who originally got these weapons and who were suppose to go to war against ISIS. But even with this CIA cut-off the Syrian civil war is going to continue .... there are just too many arms and too many outside governments vested in keeping the conflict alive.
More News On President Trump Cancelling The CIA Program Started By President Obama To Arm And Train Syria's Rebels
Report: Trump ending secret CIA program to arm Syrian rebels -- CBS
Trump 'ends programme to arm anti-Assad rebels' in move sought by Russia -- The Independent
Victory for Putin as Trump ends CIA program to arm Syrian rebels which Kremlin boss had claimed was illegal -- Daily Mail
Trump shuts down CIA program to arm Syrian rebels: report -- The Hill
Donald Trump drops CIA programme in Syria 'in bid to improve Russia ties' -- The Guardian
U.S. Drops CIA Support For Anti-Assad Syrian Rebels To Please Russia: Reports -- RFE
'Trump ends CIA support for anti-Assad Syria rebels' -- Al Jazeera
Trump cancels CIA program to arm, train Syrian rebels: report -- NYPost
Trump to end CIA support for anti-Assad forces in Syria – reports -- RT
'Putin won in Syria': Trump is reportedly ending the CIA's covert program to arm Syrian rebels -- Business Insider
3 comments:
What was the opportunity cost for this conflict? What could we have spent the money on instead. What endeavors could these young men instead have worked on. What horrors for the families in this country could have been avoided. What a horrible waste this has been. I'm glad to see we have stopped digging, but still many will be dragged into the pit that has been created.
American policy: against keeping Assad in power. CIA set up to funnel supplies in support of rebels. Russia and Iran sided with Asssad. Trump announced he would leave all military decisions to generals on the ground.
Trump met a 2nd time with Putin. Next day CIA told to stop assisting rebels. The general on the ground did NOT make that decision, nor would they have.
Conclusion: Trump did what Putin wanted.
Fred,
"Conclusion: Trump did what Putin wanted." Arming the rebels who were little different from Al Qaeda/ISIS was a bad idea. Discontinuing this program was/is the right decision.
"American policy against keeping Assad in power." As I patiently explained at the start of the Syrian Civil War, Assad was not going to go anywhere unless the Russians agreed he should go. They simply were not going to allow him to be removed. As such, a policy calling for the removal of Assad was/is only going to fail and lead to more pain, suffering, and misery among a great deal of people.
When negotiating, sometimes you may do what the other side "wants." In this case, assuming Trump did what Putin "wanted" this would not necessarily be a bad thing as to do so in this case is clearly in our interests. Obviously we will not do everything they want nor will we agree on everything but where obvious changes are needed and can be implemented even if it is what the other side "wants" we should not refrain from the obvious change simply because it is what the other side "wants."
Surely our leadership is not so petty. DJT as a businessperson could not afford to be so petty, not doing what Putin "wanted" because we can't be seen making a concession and discontinuing a bad policy. Such pettiness is generally reserved for little children and politicians. Serious people cannot afford such pettiness.
Unfortunately "Russia-Gate" all because some petty person lost an election and she has other petty allies must make excuses has very likely upset a very delicate diplomatic process that took months if not years to put together. Now thanks to these people we have exacerbated Cold War 2, a war we can't afford, lack the resources to prosecute effectively and did not need.
I do not think history is going to be kind to such people. Perhaps the best thing for them would be for DJT and his team to succeed. In this case, history will remember them badly but only as a footnote who managed to only cause minimal damage.
Post a Comment