The Appropriations Battle over Funding “Moderate” Terrorists
Two weeks ago, John Brennan admitted on a Sunday show that sometimes when we “push the envelope … to protect this country” it “stimulates and spurs additional threats to our national security interests.” In a post on his comments, I suggested he might be thinking specifically of Syria as much as generally of counterterrorism.
Today, the WaPo cites “U.S. officials” complaining that the House Intelligence Committee voted to cut 10% off CIA’s Syrian budget.
The measure has provoked concern among CIA and White House officials, who warned that pulling money out of the CIA effort could weaken U.S.-backed insurgents just as they have begun to emerge as effective fighters. The White House declined to comment.
Arrayed against those anonymous whiners, the WaPo cites Adam Schiff on the record and a senior aide anonymously, describing how the CIA effort isn’t tracked with real metrics and hasn’t done much to weaken Assad.
“There is a great deal of concern on a very bipartisan basis with our strategy in Syria,” said Rep. Adam B. Schiff (Calif.), the ranking Democrat on the intelligence panel. He declined to comment on specific provisions of the committee’s bill but cited growing pessimism that the United States will be in a position “to help shape the aftermath” of Syria’s civil war.
[snip]
“Assad is increasingly in danger, and people may be taking bets on how long he can last, but it’s largely not as a result of action by so-called moderates on the ground,” said a senior Republican aide in Congress, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, citing the sensitivity of the subject.
[snip]
“Unfortunately, I think that ISIS, al-Nusra and some of the other radical Islamic factions are the best positioned to capitalize on the chaos that might accompany a rapid decline of the regime,” Schiff said.
Underlying it all, though, appears to be yet another effort (one we’ve seen with propaganda in the press as well) to claim those linked to al Qaeda in Syria are “moderate,” which in turn permits insiders to believe they’ll have some control over Syria after our Sunni and Israeli allies pull off his defeat.
Remember: Devin Nunes has long shown skepticism about our efforts to use proxy terrorists to spread democracy. And Adam Schiff is simply smarter than the kind of person who typically gets to be a ranking member of an Intelligence Committee. Good for them for finally insisting on metrics and — absent that — reining in the CIA’s gravy train.
That’s the plan
Without spending half a day digging up the links; the US government created ISIS
i’m beginning to think congress may finally be getting a belly full of arrogant, uber-executive presidents like g.w. and b.h.
but then, in the end, …….
“sometimes when we “push the envelope …spurs additional threats to our national security interests.”
.
On one level, that means that some people rebel against the US military world control and assassination programs and actually resist US world hegemony with violent attacks on Americans, which is why the State Dept. has issued a world-wide travel caution for American travelers. The US traveler – unsafe in any country! Thanks, Washington for less personal security.
.
But less personal security is not anything they care about. It’s “national security” — the ability of the nation and its corporate promoters to be unfettered in their global pursuit of profit, when threats to “national security” are welcome because they mean more profits for Lockheed and Raytheon, among others. More radars, more anti-ballistic missile defense, more this and that.
.
So Brennan is doing the right things for the nation. Less national security is the objective. Be afraid, very afraid, of North Korea and Iran especially. Sure.
The US has long allied with Islamic radicals to “get the job done.” Afghanistan, Libya, now Syria, it’s whatever promotes US interests and it could be anyone.
.
The US has a huge air base right down the road from al-Qaeda’s spiritual base and financial backer in Doha, Qatar. I bet the AQ’s are at the bar for happy hour every day.
.
US support of ISIS is described here. Saved JohnT half a day.
As President Obama continues to vacillate over his responses to the Syrian civil war, Saudi Arabia and Turkey have stepped up their efforts to topple the Baathist regime of President Assad (with the tacit support of Israel). The state is being set for a Cambodian-style catastrophe in the heart of the Middle East. If this occurs, there will be millions of embittered refugees in camps throughout the Middle East and in Europe seeking revenge against the perpetrators of this outcome. So what will the jihadists do once they have Damascus in their grip? Surely, Amman, Jordan has to be in their sights. Given Israel’s seeming indifference to what is presently going on in Syria, many people in Tel Aviv will begin to ask in the aftermath, how did Israel allow itself to be surrounded by Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, and al-Nusra in Syria and Jordan? As the saying goes, be careful what you for; your wish may be granted.
Has anyone ever told them that we’d be better off (and have much less of a budget deficit) if we stopped funding all these groups?
right on!
and stop funding the wars our leaders create (not that congress ever bothered to fund the afghan and iraq wars).
The Congress funded the wars, with Obama (until he left the Senate) and the Dems joining with the Repubs to vote aye on every funding bill.
you didn’t understand my meaning.
the iraq war was not funded in the normal sense. various accounting tricks were used by the bush administration to hide its cost.
principal among these was “supplemental appropriations” described here (with clear reference to the war):
.
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-314
.
.
the bag of accounting tricks used to hide the true cost of that disastrous war are discussed here:
.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/mar/11/us-public-defrauded-hidden-cost-iraq-war
MOA on the strategy of supporting AQ and creating instability, which lead to positive results in politics, profits and controlling the world. here.
.
“The CIA is also prominently helping AlQaeda by sponsoring “moderate rebels” in Syria and providing them with weapons at a cost of $1 billion per year. These weapons as well as the CIA trained fighters inevitable end up with the jihadists. . . . . It is now planning to steal the north eastern parts and to control the valuable water resources there. The excuse for doing so is the chaos it created itself by supporting AlQaeda against the Syrian army and the threat AlQaeda now poses against the local population on the Syrian side of the heights:”