Video: US declares core of Syrian resistance an AQ affiliate

posted at 8:41 am on December 11, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

They’re only about 10% of the rebel forces attempting to dislodge that noted reformer Bashar al-Assad, CNN’s Nick Paton Walsh reports, but Jabhat al-Nusra is the most effective and powerful part of the insurrection against the Iranian-backed dictator. The only problem for the US is that they’re closely affiliated with al-Qaeda in Iraq, which has been attempting to overthrow the democratically-elected government in Baghdad, too. If this is starting to sound familiar, just think …. Libya:

The Christian Science Monitor has more background on the “foreign terrorist organization” that’s staffed by veterans of some old, familiar places:

The speed with which the US government moved to designate a fairly new group that has never attacked US interests and is engaged in fighting a regime that successive administrations have demonized is evidence of the strange bedfellows and overlapping agendas that make the Syrian civil war so explosive.

The State Department says Jabhat al-Nusra (or the “Nusra Front”) is essentially a wing of Al Qaeda in Iraq, the jihadi group that flourished in Anbar Province after the US invaded to topple theBaathist regime of secular dictator Saddam Hussein. During the Iraqwar, Sunni Arab tribesmen living along the Euphrates in eastern Syria flocked to fight with the friends and relatives in the towns along the Euphrates river in Anbar Province. …

The Nusra Front has gone from victory to victory in eastern Syria and has shown signs of both significant funding and greater military prowess than the average citizens’ militia, with veterans of fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya among its numbers.

The US of course aided the fight in Libya to bring down Muammar Qaddafi. In Afghanistan and Iraq, the chance to fight and kill Americans was the major drawing card.

Their presence might tempt Barack Obama to send in US forces to keep chemical weapons out of the Nusra Front’s hands:

The Obama administration appears eager for Assad to fall, but is also afraid of what might replace him, not least because of Syria’s chemical weapons stockpile. If the regime collapses, the aftermath is sure to be chaotic, much as it was in Libya, where arms stores were looted throughout the country. The presence of VX and sarin nerve gas, and the fear of Al Qaeda aligned militants getting their hands on it, has the US considering sending in troops to secure the weapons.

That’s the context in which today’s designation was made – part of an overall effort to shape the Syrian opposition to US liking, and hopefully have influence in the political outcome if and when Assad’s regime collapses. But while the US has been trying to find a government or leadership in waiting among Syrian exiles, Nusra has been going from strength to strength. Aaron Zelin, who tracks jihadi groups at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, notes in a recent piece for Foreign Policy that 20 out of the 48 “martyrdom” notices posted on Al Qaeda forums for the Syria war were made by people claiming to be members of Nusra.

This Arab Spring-destabilization business is pretty dangerous after all, no?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

We should mind our own business for once.

MoreLiberty on December 11, 2012 at 8:42 AM

Was there ever any doubt?

CorporatePiggy on December 11, 2012 at 8:44 AM

how did this ever happen? So AQ is going to get Sadaam’s chemical weapons after all.

Rio Linda Refugee on December 11, 2012 at 8:46 AM

US declares core of Syrian resistance an AQ affiliate

In other news, US to support Syrian resistance wholeheartedly.

Steve Eggleston on December 11, 2012 at 8:47 AM

Man, this is so freaking bad. This will not end well…

JohnGalt23 on December 11, 2012 at 8:49 AM

After Obama armed them, and after the Russians stopped him with the attack on Benghazi.

MarkT on December 11, 2012 at 8:51 AM

*shuts off the computer to get drunk*

BigGator5 on December 11, 2012 at 8:52 AM

So, does this mean the President can be charged with aiding and abetting a known terrorist organization?

Tenwheeler on December 11, 2012 at 8:54 AM

part of an overall effort to shape the Syrian opposition to US liking, and hopefully have influence in the political outcome if and when Assad’s regime collapses.

We are so far behind the eight ball on this one, there is no catching up.

Jabberwock on December 11, 2012 at 8:55 AM

Press Relations » Daily Press Briefings » 2012 » December » Daily Press Briefing – December 10, 2012

Victoria Nuland
Spokesperson
Daily Press Briefing
Washington, DC
December 10, 2012
******************

QUESTION: Is the U.S. going to label the Al-Nusra Front a terrorist organization in Syria because of its ties to al-Qaida in Iraq?

MS. NULAND: Well, you’ve probably seen a pre-notification in the Federal Register. We will have more to say about this tomorrow in the coming days. What I would say is that I think you know that we’ve had concerns that Al-Nusra is little more than a front for al-Qaida in Iraq, who has moved some of its operations into Syria. This, again, goes to the environment that Assad and his regime have created with their violence, that they have, as we’ve been concerned about for many months, created an environment with this violence that extremists can now try to exploit. So that we do see al-Qaida in Iraq trying to make these inroads, but I don’t have anything to announce with regard to legal steps of ours today.

QUESTION: And finally, is there any truth to some reports of chemical weapons being used inside Syria? There’s some video footage this weekend on Al Arabiya.

MS. NULAND: That something has actually been used?

QUESTION: Yes, yes.

MS. NULAND: I don’t have anything to confirm that.

QUESTION: Thank you.

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2012/12/201751.htm

canopfor on December 11, 2012 at 8:58 AM

This Arab Spring-destabilization business is pretty dangerous after all, no?

No. The election is over. The rat-eared wonder can put away the mission accomplished banner and get back to ignoring foreign affairs. At least until another ambassador is sodomized and killed.

Happy Nomad on December 11, 2012 at 9:05 AM

how did this ever happen? So AQ is going to get Sadaam’s chemical weapons after all.

Rio Linda Refugee on December 11, 2012 at 8:46 AM

Didn’t you get the 10 or 15,000 memos that said there weren’t any and Bush lied.

docflash on December 11, 2012 at 9:05 AM

Good grief…

CoffeeLover on December 11, 2012 at 9:06 AM

Isn’t that Obama gaggle a brilliant bunch of foreign policy geniuses?

rplat on December 11, 2012 at 9:07 AM

From the Foreign Policy blog (Headline on Drudge right now)

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will not attend the Dec. 12 meeting of the Friends of Syria in Morocco due to a lingering stomach ailment.

Clinton was expected to make news at the event by formally recognizing the National Coalition for Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces, the new opposition leadership organization put together last month in Doha with the help of the State Department, as the legitimate representative of the Syrian people. That designation would pave the way for the U.S. to increase its aid to the Syrian opposition.

So who is the National Coalition for Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces?

Night Owl on December 11, 2012 at 9:11 AM

Mark C. Toner
Deputy Department Spokesman
Daily Press Briefing
Washington, DC
December 7, 2012
****************

SYRIA

Russians / International Efforts to Achieve a Political Solution to the Syria Crisis
Battles in Damascus Suburbs
Syrian Opposition Military Command
Chemical Weapons / Red Lines
Aleppo / Humanitarian Assistance
_____________________________________

QUESTION: Syria?

MR. TONER: Syria.

QUESTION: Do you have any other update regarding these chemical weapons in Syria?

MR. TONER: I do not.

QUESTION: You do not? About Patriots that are going to Turkey, and Germans just passed (inaudible.) There’s the expectation that this – some come from U.S. as well. Are you prepared to make any –

MR. TONER: Not at this time. But we’ve obviously – the Secretary did the other day, as we have from the podium, expressed our satisfaction that this – NATO took this decision. We stand with our ally Turkey, but I don’t have anything to announce yet.

QUESTION: You’re asking about (inaudible) the –

MR. TONER: I did, I spoke to it yesterday.

QUESTION: — yesterday. Is there a decision that we can –

MR. TONER: Nothing to announce.

QUESTION: There was a sense on Thursday that perhaps Russia was changing its position on whether Assad could be part of any solution to a new Syria. And in her comments today in Belfast, the Secretary seemed to suggest that perhaps we are all over-reading what happened or what came out of the meeting that she had with Sergey Lavrov and Lakhdar Brahimi. Can you clarify what Russia’s stand is in trying to resolve the Syrian crisis?

MR. TONER: Rosiland, that’s – that’s a question, really, you’re going to have to direct to the Russians. The Secretary spoke at length on Syria and on yesterday’s session this morning in Belfast. She said it was a constructive session. She said that the United States and Russia have committed to support a renewed push by Special Envoy Brahimi and his team to work with all the stakeholders in Syria to advance a political solution to the crisis in Syria based on the outline that the Security Council members and Syria’s neighbors agreed to last June in Geneva. And our next step is going to be a meeting in the next few days that Special Envoy Brahimi will host. And that will obviously include senior officials from both the U.S. and Russia.

QUESTION: But isn’t that significant, though, that you finally start to see some sort of movement from Moscow to try to actually help bring this crisis to some sort of resolution, given the repeated obstacles it’s presented in the Security Council?

MR. TONER: Again, I think – what it was characterized yesterday as an initial step. Let’s let this – give it some time to develop. But obviously, we’re looking to this next meeting in the coming days, and obviously, we’re very concerned about ending the violence in Syria and moving towards a political transition, and we’re going to support efforts to do so.

QUESTION: Where will they be held, and when?

MR. TONER: I don’t have anything to announce.

QUESTION: If you were to quantify Assad’s grip on power in Syria – I mean, this could be like a bargaining chip for him. And obviously you guys think that he cannot be part of any process. But if he does control a major part of Syria still, I think that does give him a bargaining position, doesn’t it?

MR. TONER: Said, it’s very clear, as we’ve seen from really the bloody battles that have been taking place within Damascus, within the suburbs in Damascus – I think yesterday more than 100 people were killed in and around Damascus, so the fighting continues – it’s obviously getting closer to the seat of Assad’s power. He clearly has to be feeling the pressure not only of the conflict that’s growing closer to him and his cronies, but also the weight of countless economic sanctions that have been levied against him by the international community. He has – he is the leader of a pariah government and the clock is ticking. We don’t know when, though.

QUESTION: So he has no other option besides stepping down?

MR. TONER: Yes. And the Secretary is very clear about saying that the United States wants to see the Syrian people – or wants to see a transition process, rather, that results in a unified, democratic Syria, and that Assad clearly has demonstrated that he can’t be part of that future.

QUESTION: In a related, sort of, development there, apparently a bunch of Syrian rebel groups are holding yet another meeting in Turkey specifically to discuss their military coordination, that they’ve elected a kind of unified command, which apparently includes a lot of folks with ties to the Salafists and the Muslim Brotherhood.

Number one: Are you – is there any U.S. observer or is the U.S. sort of monitoring this in real time? And secondly, do you have any read or reaction to the formation and the sort of makeup of the central command?

MR. TONER: Andy, I can’t confirm any U.S. role. I don’t – I’ve seen reports – news reports about this meeting. As to the makeup of its military command, as you just mentioned, the Syrian opposition put forward in Cairo last July a vision for a democratic Syria that respects the freedoms of all Syrians. And we, the United States, as well as the other Friends of the Syrian people, obviously support that vision.

And just speaking more broadly about the makeup of this military command, as I saw in the news reports, the Secretary has been clear, others have been clear all along in speaking about other transitions that it doesn’t matter what you call yourself; it matters, ultimately, about how you govern.

QUESTION: The initiative that you talked about is the Geneva points, correct?

MR. TONER: That’s right.

QUESTION: Okay. Are you certain that all the opposition groups agree to that?

MR. TONER: Again, that’s the vision that we’re committed to and we believe the Syrian opposition is as well.

Yeah, go ahead.

QUESTION: Mark, change of subject?

QUESTION: No, no, no.

MR. TONER: Keep it up.

QUESTION: Yeah, just – I wanted to know if you were able to get a – extract an answer from the big thinkers, the ethicists and moralists in the building, about why the use of chemical weapons would be this redline.

MR. TONER: Matt, these are weapons of mass destruction that we’re talking about and the international community, including the United States, has been clear that the use of these kinds of weapons of mass destruction is unacceptable. And we have seen Assad, as I just mentioned, as the leader of a pariah government – a pariah state – show unimaginable cruelty against his own people. And we have been very clear that, again, given the horrific nature of these kinds of weapons that his – or any movement towards their use would be unacceptable.

QUESTION: Okay, well –

MR. TONER: And I don’t think it takes a real big thinker to understand that. I think it’s –

QUESTION: No, but I –

MR. TONER: — very clear that these would cross a redline.

QUESTION: Well, no, I mean, you say that it’s very clear that they would cross a redline, but frankly, I think there are a lot of people out there who might think that it doesn’t matter how people are killed. It’s bad anyway.

MR. TONER: And I agree that –

QUESTION: And I’m not going to take issue with your answer. I’m glad that you have one, and I won’t argue with it, but aren’t you at all concerned that this sends a message that you can go out and slaughter as many people as you want with conventional weapons and we won’t intervene? But the second that you do something with WMD –

MR. TONER: Matt, that’s – that is absolutely –

QUESTION: You’re not concerned that that’s the message that’s going to be –

MR. TONER: That’s not a message that we’re sending in any way, shape, or form.

QUESTION: And you’re not – well, I know it’s not the message that you want to send –

MR. TONER: We are –

QUESTION: — but is there any concern that that is the message that is being sent: that unless you do something that uses WMD, we don’t care what you do. You can kill as many of your own people as you want to.

MR. TONER: But I think we’ve shown by our actions to date that as we, the United States, and other Friends of Syrian People, as well as a broader coalition of countries and organizations that are, frankly, outraged and disgusted by what’s going on in Syria, there’s unprecedented political and economic pressure arrayed against Assad. And that doesn’t happen overnight, and it’s a long process to build, but as a result, he is under pressure

QUESTION: All right.

MR. TONER: — both internationally as well as domestically. And you’re absolutely right: 40,000 deaths is unacceptable, and he and his cronies will be held accountable for that – for those deaths.

QUESTION: I guess I just don’t understand. If you’re already outraged and disgusted by what he’s doing, why hasn’t that been a trigger for any kind of an intervention? And then – so that’s one.

And then two, if in fact there is going to be some kind of intervention if, in fact, chemical weapons are used – well, I lost my train of thought now, but I guess – so I guess if you’re already – let’s just stick with if you’re already outraged and disgusted, why hasn’t that been a better redline?

MR. TONER: First of all, you’re – I think you’re presuming specific action. We’re not going to get into what specific action we may or may not take, only that it would be a redline, and we’re very stern in our warning to the Syrian Government that it would be a redline. So I don’t want to prejudge what actions we may or may not take in that context.

QUESTION: Okay. And that –

MR. TONER: But in answer to your question, again, I’d just go back to my previous point which is that we are working very hard to see Assad leave power, to get him out of the way so that a political transition can take place and the violence can end. And that’s been our goal for these many months, and it continues to be our goal.

QUESTION: Okay. And then slightly related to that –

MR. TONER: Yeah.

QUESTION: — is this idea – there was a story, a report about this this morning, I think – about the redline shifting or evolving from what the President originally said it was and what I think I asked you about earlier this week or last week, which was his first comment about movement or use of, and I believe you got back to me with a quote that said proliferation. But I don’t think that quote was correct.

MR. TONER: It is correct. We’re talking about – we have not changed.

QUESTION: Well, then they’re talking about two separate sentences then.

MR. TONER: We’ve not changed. The President was very clear: Any use or proliferation of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime would cross a redline. We haven’t changed that. There’s been no evolution of that statement.

QUESTION: On the point of weapons of mass destruction – chemical weapons included – if they were so horrible – and they are – why did you opt out of the conference to make the Middle East a weapons of mass destruction-free zone?

MR. TONER: Well, I don’t think we opted out. I think we said at this time that the conditions aren’t right for that conference to take place, but I would refer you back to the statement that we put out. It’s still our goal.

QUESTION: Do we know where Jihad Makdissi is?

MR. TONER: — to hold that conference. Go ahead, Rosalind.

QUESTION: Do we know where Jihad Madkissi is, and perhaps more important, why does it matter if we know where he is? I mean, if the –

MR. TONER: (Laughter.) That’s a very good question. It’s you guys basically asking us. I mean, we’ve seen a steady erosion of those around Assad, these defections. I jokingly said that of course a spokesperson is an important part of any government, but seriously, we have no idea where he is, and it just, I think, is a further indication, however, that those around Assad are looking for the exits.

QUESTION: Mark, is the use of burns of explosions from the regime acceptable?

MR. TONER: The use of?

QUESTION: Burns, burns of explosions.

MR. TONER: None of this is acceptable. I don’t know – you’re asking me to qualify what’s taken place or to somehow say that we’re not outraged by all the conventional means that Assad’s been using against his own people. And we are. It’s unacceptable.

Yeah, in the back. Are we –

QUESTION: Is there then a number of deaths that there has to be from conventional weapons before there’s a redline?

MR. TONER: Matt –

QUESTION: I don’t – I guess – and if there is, what is that number?

MR. TONER: Matt, there’s no number – 40,000 deaths is far too many. We just don’t want to see that accelerated exponentially –

QUESTION: Okay.

MR. TONER: — through the use of weapons of mass destruction, which is a horrific –

QUESTION: All right, but I – no one’s arguing with that. It’s just that it’s –

MR. TONER: Okay.

QUESTION: I guess it’s an ethical question. A gas attack, a sarin gas attack, could kill a lot of people or it could kill just dozens. But that is a redline, whereas those dozens of deaths would be a redline if they’re caused by a chemical weapons attack –

MR. TONER: I think we’ve –

QUESTION: — of 40,000 deaths –

MR. TONER: I think we’ve been around this and around this, Matt.

QUESTION: — from convention weapons is not enough to bring –

MR. TONER: Matt –

QUESTION: — international intervention? I just –

MR. TONER: First of all, you’re –

QUESTION: I’d like to know –

MR. TONER: First of all, you’re – again, you’re presuming intervention. We’ve not said what we would do, only that it is a redline. I don’t know.

In the back, Lalit.

QUESTION: Change of subject?

MR. TONER: Sure.

QUESTION: Can I do one more on Aleppo? Apparently, there is a lack of electricity, there is a lack of food; it’s getting worse. It’s across Syria, but a couple of American journalists actually in Aleppo and they’ve been reporting some people are hungry. The question is: Why these people cannot get more help or just food from Turkey, for example? There’s a –

MR. TONER: Right.

QUESTION: There’s liberated areas north of Aleppo.

MR. TONER: Well, I know. I don’t know specifically what the – I mean, obviously, the challenges are obvious in trying to get assistance to where it’s needed within Syria. Specifically with regard to Aleppo, I know that assistance organizations, NGOs, nongovernmental organizations, are working hard, and we’re obviously contributing to their efforts financially to get food and other much-needed resources to these people. But specifically, I don’t know what the hang-up is for assisting them.

QUESTION: Are you concerned – I mean, are you going to try to get to bottom of this whether – I mean, is there a lack of leadership? Is there – I mean, is it Turkey’s problem?

MR. TONER: Well, we’ve been working on – we’ve been working with the Syrian Opposition Coalition. That’s one of the primary objectives that they’re working on, which is how to organize themselves on the ground to deliver these kinds of assistance to make sure that it gets to the people in need.
(More….)
=============

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2012/12/201670.htm

canopfor on December 11, 2012 at 9:12 AM

We should mind our own business for once.
MoreLiberty on December 11, 2012 at 8:42 AM

Al Qaeda running Syria – and the Obama supported Muslim Brotherhood running Egypt – isn’t our business? You think Liberty is free? The price of Liberty is eternal vigilance.

Basilsbest on December 11, 2012 at 9:20 AM

So who is the National Coalition for Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces?

Night Owl on December 11, 2012 at 9:11 AM

No! We’re the National Syrian Revolutionary Opposition Coalition!

Bishop on December 11, 2012 at 9:22 AM

So what? The obama administration is an AQ affiliate as well, and poses a much greater threat to America, and the world, than any little amateur AQ cell in Syria.

Pork-Chop on December 11, 2012 at 9:23 AM

Is it to late to switch our support to Assad?

sharrukin on December 11, 2012 at 9:23 AM

Their presence might tempt Barack Obama to send in US forces to keep chemical weapons out of the Nusra Front’s hands:


Obama:

….abandon Iraq to the power and influence of Iran by taking all troops out without successfully negotiating any kind of partnership like we did in Japan/Germany.

…………lose the war in Afghanistan.

…………….support the power grab of Egypt by the muslim brotherhood which has led to disastrous results.

………………….launch a war against Libya without Congressional approval…an oil rich country that did not attack us,and posed no imminent threat(yea…no blood for oil!!!..those were the good ole days)….which has led to arming jihadist like al-qaeda while they take control of the country and the surrounding area.

Pakistan and the jihadist that it’s supports within it’s boarders has gained more power throughout the region including helping the Taliban/al-qaeda regain power in Afghanistan .Now the Obama administration declares that “The Taliban are not our enemy”…..

……………and now Obama wants to go into Syria…..
….with his fantastic “smart power” track record…..this should work out real well.

Baxter Greene on December 11, 2012 at 9:29 AM

The Nusra Front has gone from victory to victory in eastern Syria and has shown signs of both significant funding

Who’s funding them? Qatar? Which enjoys the protection of the US military?
Gawd, what a pit of vipers we are in.

rbj on December 11, 2012 at 9:30 AM

No! We’re the National Syrian Revolutionary Opposition Coalition!

Bishop on December 11, 2012 at 9:22 AM

Splitter!

rbj on December 11, 2012 at 9:31 AM

None of this is any of our business.

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 9:36 AM

Al Qaeda running Syria – and the Obama supported Muslim Brotherhood running Egypt – isn’t our business? You think Liberty is free? The price of Liberty is eternal vigilance.

Basilsbest on December 11, 2012 at 9:20 AM

…..I agree…this is serious and effects us in a serious way.

But we have shown the world that we do not fight wars to win…that politics and polls control our military decision making.

Losing Afghanistan and turning our backs on the successful gains in Iraq will hurt any real coalition that we could hope to pull together.

This is a serious threat to us…..but I am not in favor of sending our men and women in uniform off to fight battles that we are not going to do everything in our power to win.

We have the strongest military and some of the great military minds…..and this country’s leadership chose capitulation over victory.

9/11 was not enough to wake people up….unfortunately it is going to take the jihadist gaining more power and inflicting major damage on the West before we fight this radical threat with everything we have and losing not being an option.

Remember….in 2001 we were destroying the Mosques of the jihadist……now we build Mosques for them.

Baxter Greene on December 11, 2012 at 9:40 AM

Al Qaeda running Syria – and the Obama supported Muslim Brotherhood running Egypt – isn’t our business? You think Liberty is free? The price of Liberty is eternal vigilance.

Basilsbest on December 11, 2012 at 9:20 AM

When did Syria and Egypt join the Union?

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 9:52 AM

9/11 was not enough to wake people up….unfortunately it is going to take the jihadist gaining more power and inflicting major damage on the West before we fight this radical threat with everything we have and losing not being an option.

Remember….in 2001 we were destroying the Mosques of the jihadist……now we build Mosques for them.

Baxter Greene on December 11, 2012 at 9:40 AM

Unfortunately, you need to include yourself in that group. 9/11 was a direct consequence of our interventionism.

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 9:53 AM

No! We’re the National Syrian Revolutionary Opposition Coalition!

Bishop on December 11, 2012 at 9:22 AM

LOL! Well, I don’t care what they’re called, they are all a bunch of savages and I want both sides to lose.

Night Owl on December 11, 2012 at 9:53 AM

“Affiliate”? It is a f***ing wholly owned subsidiary!

Archivarix on December 11, 2012 at 9:57 AM

Unfortunately, you need to include yourself in that group. 9/11 was a direct consequence of our interventionism.

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 9:53 AM

Blame America First.

If Denmark couldn’t avoid being targeted by Muslim nutjobs, then nothing the US does will avoid it.

sharrukin on December 11, 2012 at 10:00 AM

Blame America First.

sharrukin on December 11, 2012 at 10:00 AM

Well, that’s one way to be intellecutally dishonest. Or one could look at Bin Laden’s 1996 fatwa (published by PBS and the NYT, I believe. Regardless, it’s easily found online) and the CIA’s findings as well.

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 10:05 AM

Al Qaeda running Syria – and the Obama supported Muslim Brotherhood running Egypt – isn’t our business? You think Liberty is free? The price of Liberty is eternal vigilance.

It’s none of our business. Let the Europeans deal with it. I’m tired of wasting our treasure and American soldiers/ marines on this nonsense. It’s bankrupting us. We should be concerned with our borders and not with internal conflicts of foreign nations.

MoreLiberty on December 11, 2012 at 10:09 AM

Naive idiots like you think that all aggression towards the United States will magically stop if we simply put our heads in the sand.

blink on December 11, 2012 at 10:04 AM

But I don’t think that at all.

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 10:10 AM

Unfortunately, you need to include yourself in that group. 9/11 was a direct consequence of our interventionism.

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 9:53 AM

No dumbass….
…9/11 was the direct result of radical jihadist wanting to destroy anyone who did not adhere to their religious fanaticism and the failure of this country to take the threat seriously.

We were attacked by jihadist well before 9/11 and will continue to be attacked by them until either they win or we do.

Your naive capitulation does not ring true for the many countries and people who have been attacked by the jihadist without any “interventionism”….Indonesia….Philippine…. India….Russia….France.

But I guess in your opinion….allowing jihadist to dictate where other countries are allowed to associate and do business ..even when invited to do so by said country….is the smart route.

The jihadist consider many Europeans and Asians to be on “their land”….you know…”interventionist”…..

…..guess they need to move right genius????

Baxter Greene on December 11, 2012 at 10:11 AM

Well, that’s one way to be intellecutally dishonest. Or one could look at Bin Laden’s 1996 fatwa (published by PBS and the NYT, I believe. Regardless, it’s easily found online) and the CIA’s findings as well.

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 10:05 AM

Maybe you should try reading it.

Massacres in Tajakestan, Burma, Cashmere, Assam, Philippine, Fatani, Ogadin, Somalia, Erithria, Chechnia and in Bosnia-Herzegovina took place, massacres that send shivers in the body and shake the conscience.

Many of those have nothing to do with the United States yet they are listed as a cause for war.

The US backed the Muslims in Bosnia-Herzegovina against the Serbs.

Your groveling to the Muslim terrorists isn’t going to save you.

sharrukin on December 11, 2012 at 10:17 AM

No dumbass….
…9/11 was the direct result of radical jihadist wanting to destroy anyone who did not adhere to their religious fanaticism and the failure of this country to take the threat seriously.

We were attacked by jihadist well before 9/11 and will continue to be attacked by them until either they win or we do.

Your naive capitulation does not ring true for the many countries and people who have been attacked by the jihadist without any “interventionism”….Indonesia….Philippine…. India….Russia….France.

But I guess in your opinion….allowing jihadist to dictate where other countries are allowed to associate and do business ..even when invited to do so by said country….is the smart route.

The jihadist consider many Europeans and Asians to be on “their land”….you know…”interventionist”…..

…..guess they need to move right genius????

Baxter Greene on December 11, 2012 at 10:11 AM

Name calling? Really?

And establishing military bases in foreign countries, specifically Saudi Arabia, is your idea of “doing business”?

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 10:21 AM

It’s obvious that you do. It’s almost as if you pretend that the US doesn’t have any interests outside our shores.

blink on December 11, 2012 at 10:18 AM

Oh, not at all. The War Party Establishment and the tiny group of people who control and direct our foreign policy clearly have interests beyond our shores. That interest, however, conflicts with the US’ interests and with the peoples’.

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 10:23 AM

Maybe you should try reading it.

Massacres in Tajakestan, Burma, Cashmere, Assam, Philippine, Fatani, Ogadin, Somalia, Erithria, Chechnia and in Bosnia-Herzegovina took place, massacres that send shivers in the body and shake the conscience.

Many of those have nothing to do with the United States yet they are listed as a cause for war.

The US backed the Muslims in Bosnia-Herzegovina against the Serbs.

Your groveling to the Muslim terrorists isn’t going to save you.

sharrukin on December 11, 2012 at 10:17 AM

Well that was a great example of cherry picking. I see you deliberately left out the part of military bases in Saudi Arabia and our occupations of other lands.

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 10:26 AM

Well, that’s one way to be intellecutally dishonest. Or one could look at Bin Laden’s 1996 fatwa (published by PBS and the NYT, I believe. Regardless, it’s easily found online) and the CIA’s findings as well.

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 10:05 AM

…and one could look at when Osama stated that the West did not have to will to defeat them….that they were a “paper tiger” and would pack up and run.

…that’s working out great isn’t it….you know…for the jihadist that is.

But if you just leave them alone they will leave us alone.

Thousands and thousands of terrorist attacks around the world with very many of them against people who did not “intervene”….

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents,_2000

Pakistan endures terrorist attacks on a routine basis……the attacks have nothing to do with “intervention”……

………..and everything to do with radical jihadist wanting to kill anyone who does not accept shira law.

Baxter Greene on December 11, 2012 at 10:26 AM

As far as knowing what to do, it is still the middle of the night in the deepest part of the forest. And we are told the future does not belong to those who would light candles to see the way.

Dante, take Ron Pauls wrinkled old sack out of your mouth and delve a little further back in time. History is just full of background information that is quite illuminating.

BL@KBIRD on December 11, 2012 at 10:27 AM

These are probably the guys Obama was shipping guns to via the Benghazi compound, the deal went bad, they killed our guys and now we’re calling them terrorists.

EasyEight on December 11, 2012 at 10:27 AM

…and one could look at when Osama stated that the West did not have to will to defeat them….that they were a “paper tiger” and would pack up and run.

…that’s working out great isn’t it….you know…for the jihadist that is.

But if you just leave them alone they will leave us alone.

Thousands and thousands of terrorist attacks around the world with very many of them against people who did not “intervene”….

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents,_2000

Pakistan endures terrorist attacks on a routine basis……the attacks have nothing to do with “intervention”……

………..and everything to do with radical jihadist wanting to kill anyone who does not accept shira law.

Baxter Greene on December 11, 2012 at 10:26 AM

Well the sociopaths can keep sticking their noses into the affairs of other nations, since that’s been a great policy and has really worked out well for us these past 80 years or so. Or we could mind our own business and build up our defenses here where they belong. Nah…let’s keep bombing civilians; that would never come back to bite us.

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 10:36 AM

And establishing military bases in foreign countries, specifically Saudi Arabia, is your idea of “doing business”?

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 10:21 AM

We have military bases in Germany and Japan…..we do quite of bit of business with them.

We were invited to Saudi Arabia remember.

…or should we have said…“sorry…can’t build any type of relationship with you….Osama wouldn’t like it”…….

What Every American Needs to Know About Jihad
http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=41

….this excellent piece (have to go to the Pamphlet link to reach the PDF) breaks down the call for jihad around the world by radical muslims….particularly in the areas that made up the Ottoman Empire.Also quotes Islamic leaders around the world calling for the death of the West and the institution of the modern Caliphate.

…you will notice that none of them state they will refrain from their goals of destroying the West as long as we just leave them alone.

Baxter Greene on December 11, 2012 at 10:38 AM

Well that was a great example of cherry picking. I see you deliberately left out the part of military bases in Saudi Arabia and our occupations of other lands.

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 10:26 AM

You are the one who ignores what you don’t want to deal with. Your sad little ideology has no explanation for most of what happens in the world, yet you keep chanting the same tired phrases like some young Communist Pioneer quoting Marx and Engels.

Denmark has no bases in Saudi Arabia…didn’t help them.

The United States had no bases in Saudi Arabia when the Barbary Wars took place…didn’t help.

France, Britain, the Netherlands, and Germany were targeted by terrorism throughout the 60′s and 70′s despite anti-Israeli policies and again no bases in Saudi Arabia.

You fundamentally do not understand people. You do not understand Islam. Your ‘non-aggression principle’ nonsense is a case in point.

You think that if others attack, then there must be a cause that you can rationally address that will fix the problem. They will attack and pillage because you are weak and they are strong. No other reason is needed. What reasons they provide are more of an excuse for what they intended in any case.

sharrukin on December 11, 2012 at 10:38 AM

Yes, Dante, the only Americans that have any interests outside the United States are those that want to wage war and foreign policy decision makers. /sarc

blink on December 11, 2012 at 10:35 AM

I didn’t say that at all. Why do you keep making straw men arguments?

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 10:41 AM

We have military bases in Germany and Japan…..we do quite of bit of business with them.

So I’ll take that as, “yes, that is my idea of doing business.”

We were invited to Saudi Arabia remember.

Baxter Greene on December 11, 2012 at 10:38 AM

So? That changes the fact that we have military bases in a foreign country? I don’t recall the defense of Saudi Arabia or other nations being anywhere in the Constitution.

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 10:43 AM

Nah…let’s keep bombing civilians; that would never come back to bite us.

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 10:36 AM

Nah…let’s keep letting the jihadist bombing civilians; that would never come back to bite us.

..fixed that for you.

….but keep moving away from your original accusation Dante…..
It is more than obvious that the jihadist that are attacking and killing people all over the world is not due to “interventionism”….but because they want us dead.

So let’s pretend that pulling back and pretending they can’t hurt us here if we build up our defenses in a “free society” (which would be called a police state by the Ron Paul and liberal crowd)…that they can’t hurt us…you know…while they gain the power of the nuclear bomb.

Because Iran….Hezbollah….Hamas….and al-qaeda being handed this type of destructive power is nothing to worry about….you know…since our boarders and ports are so secure….just trust the government to protect us here….they have such a great record of that.

Baxter Greene on December 11, 2012 at 10:45 AM

Your sad little ideology has no explanation for most of what happens in the world, yet you keep chanting the same tired phrases like some young Communist Pioneer quoting Marx and Engels.

sharrukin on December 11, 2012 at 10:38 AM

My ideology of minding our own business and not spreading our military around the world, not for the purpose of defense, but as a foreign policy tool, is a sad ideology? Whereas your policy of interventionism isn’t?

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 10:47 AM

Nah…let’s keep letting the jihadist bombing civilians; that would never come back to bite us.

..fixed that for you.

….but keep moving away from your original accusation Dante…..
It is more than obvious that the jihadist that are attacking and killing people all over the world is not due to “interventionism”….but because they want us dead.

Baxter Greene on December 11, 2012 at 10:45 AM

Keep your head in the sand, and keep thinking that we aren’t bombing and murdering innocent people. You are exactly the type of person they depend on.

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 10:48 AM

My ideology of minding our own business and not spreading our military around the world, not for the purpose of defense, but as a foreign policy tool, is a sad ideology?

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 10:47 AM

I doubt you believe the military should even exist and you have said you are fine with North Korean nuclear missiles being deployed to Canada, and that you wouldn’t try to stop a Russian, or Chinese occupation of that country.

Yes, a sad little ideology completely divorced from reality.

You have lived for so long in comfort and under the protection of ‘men with guns’ that you think the comfort zone that exists under the shadow of that protection is the natural state of life.

It isn’t.

sharrukin on December 11, 2012 at 10:52 AM

So? That changes the fact that we have military bases in a foreign country? I don’t recall the defense of Saudi Arabia or other nations being anywhere in the Constitution.

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 10:43 AM

So we don’t build economic and military relationships with other countries because it is not specifically stated in the Constitution????

…that’s just plain stupid.

Now you stated that we were attacked due to interventionism……
….and I have produced plenty to refute that.
Not only do muslims commit terrorist attacks against each other…they commit them against plenty of people and countries that have nothing to do with “interventionism”…

Your “let’s just leave them alone and they can’t hurt us” has been dis-proven by events such as 9/11 and many other terrorist attacks around the world….and dis-proven by the jihadist own words.

You have no credibility on this issue and listening to Islaimic leaders call for the death of the West on a daily basis leads me to want to side with taking them out before they take us out….not sitting and waiting for them to come and get us like you want to do.

A dirtbag country like Afghanistan with a group of terrorist inflicted an incredible amount of damage to this country by working our freedoms against us and taking advantage of naive people who said they could not do us great harm…..
…………..a nuclear armed Iran with all of it’s proxy armies and jihadist relationships could easily make 9/11 look like just a bad day.

This threat is not going away…as a matter of fact….it has grown immensely over the last 4 years…..
……….and all the naive whining about “just leave them alone” is not going to stop them.History has already shown that.

Baxter Greene on December 11, 2012 at 10:57 AM

I doubt you believe the military should even exist and you have said you are fine with North Korean nuclear missiles being deployed to Canada, and that you wouldn’t try to stop a Russian, or Chinese occupation of that country.

sharrukin on December 11, 2012 at 10:52 AM

No, I said that I rejected your premise, and that you subsequently tried to put words in my mouth, as you are doing now.

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Now you stated that we were attacked due to interventionism……
….and I have produced plenty to refute that.

I didn’t say it just now, I said it from the start.

And you haven’t refuted it at all. Prove that 9/11 was not a result of interventionism. I’ve already pointed to bin laden’s fatwa and the CIA’s findings as evidence.

Your “let’s just leave them alone and they can’t hurt us”

Baxter Greene on December 11, 2012 at 10:57 AM

I’ve never said that. In fact, that’s why I advocate for a strong defense at home. We can’t put the genie back in the bottle, but we can certainly change our course.

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 11:02 AM

You have lived for so long in comfort and under the protection of ‘men with guns’ that you think the comfort zone that exists under the shadow of that protection is the natural state of life.

sharrukin on December 11, 2012 at 10:52 AM

Men with guns aren’t protecting you or me, but that’s a nice slant smear, trying to paint me as anti-firearms.

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 11:04 AM

Men with guns aren’t protecting you or me, but that’s a nice slant smear, trying to paint me as anti-firearms.

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 11:04 AM

I must say that it is a mystery to me how someone can grow up and understand so little of human nature and the realities of the world.

Even the dynamics in a schoolyard should have been enough to inform you about human nature and yet…here you are. Sadly, you are far from alone. Liberals across the land believe this same silly nonsense and no amount of reality informs then otherwise.

Like you, their ideology acts as a shield of invincible ignorance.

sharrukin on December 11, 2012 at 11:09 AM

Keep your head in the sand, and keep thinking that we aren’t bombing and murdering innocent people. You are exactly the type of person they depend on.

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 10:48 AM

…here’s a newsflash for you genius…
………nobody bombs and kills more innocent people than radical muslims…and you want to curl up in a fetal position and let them.

You are exactly the type of person they depend on:

Osama bin Laden once told Time magazine that the U.S. withdrawal from Somalia after the murder of 18 U.S. troops on a humanitarian mission made him realize “more than before that the American soldier was a paper tiger and after a few blows ran in defeat.” Members of al Qaeda have told intelligence officials that they never thought that Washington would respond to the 9/11 attacks as ferociously as Bush responded. They expected a few bombs to be dropped, no boots on the ground, a swift withdrawal if casualties mounted – the usual short-attention span foreign policy that warped Lebanon, the Persian Gulf War, Somalia, the African embassy bombings and the attack on the destroyer Cole.

The jihadist are counting on America having enough people just like you…..people who don’t take the threat seriously….think running from it and hiding will solve the problem…..because that has worked so well in the past.

….let’s just pull back and work on protecting ourselves….you know….massive increase in NSA wiretapping and many other means of “gaining information”…increase police presence in our everyday lives to protect us from the home grown jihadist……

….oh..that’s right…you Ron Paul types are against that to.

So let’s not take them out abroad…let’s wait for them to come here….and lets gut anything that is “intrusive” to our civil liberties that we would need to actually…you know…stop a major terrorist attack.

Damned if you do…Damned if you don’t.

Think I’ll pass on your naive activism Dante….
….I prefer reality and taking dangerous,genocidal jihadist at their word when they declare how much they want me dead.

Baxter Greene on December 11, 2012 at 11:10 AM

Baxter Greene on December 11, 2012 at 11:10 AM

Somalia, huh? When did Somalia join the Union again?

You keep giving examples of interventionism. You do realize that, don’t you?

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 11:12 AM

Dante = politicized stupidity cubed.

My only hope is that you are somewhere between 18 and 22 and have not really come to grips with life yet. You are ardent but blatantly misinformed about just about everything. It isn’t that you have points and I disagree with them, you have nothing but the wisdom of youth which can only be dismissed.

BL@KBIRD on December 11, 2012 at 11:15 AM

I didn’t say it just now, I said it from the start.

And you haven’t refuted it at all. Prove that 9/11 was not a result of interventionism. I’ve already pointed to bin laden’s fatwa and the CIA’s findings as evidence.

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 11:02 AM

…well genius….”just now” is where we are at.And the jihadist goals have changed little over the decades….what has changed is how they will carry it out.

Bin Laden has also said…before 9/11…that he wants all infidels off of muslim land….that includes much of Europe and Asia….

…9/11 was one attack of many that was carried out to achieve this goal.

I have produced many instances and direct quotes to substantiate this…..Osama goals were to further the jihad and destroy the west…jihadist take current events all the time to incite and gain support for attacks (drone strikes,you tube movies)but the bottom line is they attack us and other countries in the hopes of spreading shira law…9/11 was part of that just like the attacks on many countries that never “intervened”..

You have proven nothing except the fact that you share a lot of the same beliefs as Move on . org and Code Pink…..congratulations.

Baxter Greene on December 11, 2012 at 11:19 AM

blink on December 11, 2012 at 11:13 AM

Heh!!!

…reminds me of all the Dante’s that told us Osama and Afghanistan don’t have the capabilities of launching a serious attack or being a serious threat to Amereica before 9/11.

Baxter Greene on December 11, 2012 at 11:22 AM

Somalia, huh? When did Somalia join the Union again?

You keep giving examples of interventionism. You do realize that, don’t you?

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 11:12 AM

…never said America didn’t intervene….have plainly shown that that is not the primary reason for why the jihadist hate us…attack us…and want us dead.

The post that you clearly feel a need to distract from the point of….uses Osama’s own words as to why he does not fear attacking us…because he believed that we would act just like you advocate genius…..running away and hoping for the best.

I have posted links to many jihadist leaders that show they want the west destroyed due to being “infidel non-believers”….not because we had a base in Saudi Arabia…..

I guess in Dante land…they are all lying.

Baxter Greene on December 11, 2012 at 11:28 AM

What does that man of peace Bin Laden want?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/nov/24/theobserver

(Q1) Why are we fighting and opposing you?

The creation and continuation of Israel is one of the greatest crimes, and you are the leaders of its criminals. And of course there is no need to explain and prove the degree of American support for Israel. The creation of Israel is a crime which must be erased. Each and every person whose hands have become polluted in the contribution towards this crime must pay its*price, and pay for it heavily.

So the extermination of Israel is demanded and those who helped in its creation must be destroyed as well.

(b) You attacked us in Somalia; you supported the Russian atrocities against us in Chechnya, the Indian oppression against us in Kashmir, and the Jewish aggression against us in Lebanon.

(v) The removal of these governments is an obligation upon us, and a necessary step to free the Ummah, to make the Shariah the supreme law and to regain Palestine. And our fight against these governments is not separate from out fight against you.

So you can throw Russia and India on the funeral pyre along with Israel as well and they will keep attacking the US until that happens.

Q2)What are we calling you to, and what do we want from you?

“The first thing that we are calling you to is Islam.” “The second thing we call you to, is to stop your oppression, lies, immorality and debauchery that has spread among you.” Third, “take an honest stance with yourselves … to discover that you are a nation without principles or manners, and that the values and principles to you are something which you merely demand from others, not that which you yourself must adhere to.

So convert to Islam, accept Sharia law and stop being so sinful.

You see, he’s a reasonable man.

Dante could lead us into the new Islamic Caliphate Of America and then we wouldn’t be intervening in world affairs…well, except to spread the true faith of the Prophet(PBUH) to the infidel.

sharrukin on December 11, 2012 at 11:42 AM

And you haven’t refuted it at all. Prove that 9/11 was not a result of interventionism. I’ve already pointed to bin laden’s fatwa and the CIA’s findings as evidence.

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 11:02 AM

…and here we have Zawahari declaring jihad against America over ….a you tupe video….
…according to Dante’s logic……Zawahari stated that they want holy war against the US because of this video…..so if only we had not made it…they would not be declaring “Holy War”….


Al Qaeda leader urges holy war over Prophet film

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/10/13/al-qaida-leader-al-zawahri-urges-muslims-to-fight-us-over-prophet-film/#ixzz2ElJoPhIb

Dam# that you tube!!!!!….Dam# those bases…starting “Holy Wars” that jihadist have been advocating for decades before and after all this so called “interventionism”…

Baxter Greene on December 11, 2012 at 11:44 AM

Obama created and sustains the Arab ‘Spring’.

He is his brothers.

Schadenfreude on December 11, 2012 at 12:47 PM

See the ending of this article.

May they all be destroyed.

Schadenfreude on December 11, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Man, this is so freaking bad. This will not end well…

JohnGalt23 on December 11, 2012 at 8:49 AM

They are all your enemies, including Obama.

Schadenfreude on December 11, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Well the sociopaths can keep sticking their noses into the affairs of other nations, since that’s been a great policy and has really worked out well for us these past 80 years or so. Or we could mind our own business and build up our defenses here where they belong. Nah…let’s keep bombing civilians; that would never come back to bite us.

Dante on December 11, 2012 at 10:36 AM

You are all confused.
If we mind our own business, why need a strong defense ?
By your own words, you are saying people would attack us simply because of our existance. If that is so, what harm is done by taking the fight to them.
Sorry. Your own words.

Jabberwock on December 11, 2012 at 12:59 PM

As much I loathe the current administration, this is a sound move.

Both Assad and these resistance groups are complete animals. There are dozens of videos online posted by these ‘freedom fighters’ that are absolutely barbaric. One of which is a child attempting to hack off the head of a Syrian soldier with a machete.

There are no winners to cheer for here.

You-Eh-Vee on December 11, 2012 at 1:22 PM

And establishing military bases in foreign countries, specifically Saudi Arabia, is your idea of “doing business”?
Dante on December 11, 2012 at 10:21 AM

Your problem is that you project your own rationality onto non-rational people. Not everybody thinks like Ayn Rand. There are people who are motivated solely by irrational things, like jihad, emperor-worship, and virulent anti-antisemitism. They don’t need a reason to hate “the other” and wage a campaign of extermination against them. Whether it’s Nazis, Japanese Fascists, radical Salafist Sunnis, or Mahdist Shias, they don’t need a pretense. Death, destruction, and conquest are their raison-d’etre.

Walter Sobchak on December 11, 2012 at 1:45 PM

Well the sociopaths can keep sticking their noses into the affairs of other nations, since that’s been a great policy and has really worked out well for us these past 80 years or so. Or we could mind our own business and build up our defenses here where they belong. Nah…let’s keep bombing civilians; that would never come back to bite us.
Dante on December 11, 2012 at 10:36 AM

Having foreign bases and bombing civilians are not the same thing. Many of our troops based overseas are there at the invitation of the host countries. Unless you’re talking about securing the border (which I agree with), “Building up our defenses here” is not a viable national security strategy because there’s no such thing as a purely defensive war in the modern era. A nation at war has to be able to strike offensively at the enemy to diminish their capacity to wage war. Doing so requires secure supply lines, which requires overseas bases. I would agree that there are a lot of overseas bases that should be closed (especially in Europe after the fall of the Soviet empire; there’s no reason to continue paying for Europe’s defense so they can use their own money to maintain their cradle-to-grave welfare state). I also think it’s time to scrap the San Francisco Treaty and allow Japan to re-arm so they can contribute more to their own defense.

Walter Sobchak on December 11, 2012 at 1:57 PM