Here we go: Obama preparing to send “lethal arms” to Syrian rebels, say senior admin officials

posted at 7:21 pm on April 30, 2013 by Allahpundit

I mentioned this in the earlier Syria post but it’s worth repeating in light of WaPo’s bombshell this afternoon. A quote from this weekend’s NYT: “Nowhere in rebel-controlled Syria is there a secular fighting force to speak of.”

What could go wrong?

President Obama is preparing to send lethal weaponry to the Syrian opposition and has taken steps to assert more aggressive U.S. leadership among allies and partners seeking the ouster of President Bashar al-Assad, according to senior administration officials.

The officials emphasized that political negotiation remains the preferred option. To that end, the administration has launched a new effort to convince Russian President Vladimir Putin that the probable use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government — and the more direct outside intervention that could provoke — should lead him to reconsider his support of Assad…

[T]he senior official, one of several who discussed internal administration deliberations on the condition of anonymity, said Obama has “not closed the door to other military actions,” in response to calls from the opposition, and some members of Congress, for protection against Syrian ballistic missiles and air attacks…

Disputes among [allied] countries, particularly between Qatar and Saudi Arabia, over which rebel military faction to back has led to rising U.S. concern that sophisticated weapons, including surface-to-air missiles, are being sent directly to Islamist extremist groups. The administration is not prepared to send missiles itself, but believes it can gain more control over others’ supplies if it puts what an official called “more skin in the game” by sending its own lethal equipment.

We’re going to limit the supply of weapons by adding our own weapons? I.e. because we’re sending antitank munitions, say, the Saudis are going to stop sending them SAMs? I’m … highly skeptical that that’s true since Sunni powers in the region are now jockeying for influence over whatever degenerate Islamist faction ultimately ends up on top after Assad is gone. The best way to increase their leverage is to give the rebels the weapons they ask for. If they want SAMs, it’s SAMs they’ll get. And if America’s kicking in too, so much the better for the Saudis et al. — it means the final rebel victory and the ascendance of the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood is that much closer to happening.

Explain something to me. How did we get from “Assad’s chemical weapons must be confiscated” to “we must arm Assad’s opponents”? The big takeaway from today’s presser was that Obama himself wouldn’t commit to the idea that it was Assad rather than the rebels who are responsible for the previous chemical incidents in Syria. The only way to get from point A, i.e. WMD disarmament, to point B, i.e. regime change, is if the Pentagon’s concluded that there’s no way to confiscate Assad’s chemical arsenal with U.S. or Jordanian troops. The only way is to make a deal with the rebels that we’ll give them conventional weapons now in return for them giving us Assad’s chemical weapons later once they’ve taken over. You trust them to honor a deal like that, don’t you? Meanwhile, with the U.S. finally wading in against him, there’s arguably less deterring Assad from going full chemical now than there was yesterday. This is obviously punishment for him having allegedly crossed the “red line.” No reason not to cross it again, at least on a small scale.

At least the Libyan intervention is working out okay, though.


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

shotguns???

…just asking….

ted c on April 30, 2013 at 7:25 PM

Lethal Arms…. as opposed to TOY GUNS? I wonder if they are sending AR-15 ASSAULT WEAPONS??

originalpechanga on April 30, 2013 at 7:25 PM

Obama’s Vietnam.

portlandon on April 30, 2013 at 7:25 PM

Keep your eyes on Benghazi.

rogerb on April 30, 2013 at 7:26 PM

He’s going to arm people we have credible reports are working with al quaeda?

Why am I not surprised.

thatsafactjack on April 30, 2013 at 7:26 PM

Stones by the truck-load.

OldEnglish on April 30, 2013 at 7:26 PM

Obama’s Iran-Contra

portlandon on April 30, 2013 at 7:27 PM

Arm the jihadis…no surprise there.

Is the Administration going to do background checks…like they are demanding here, for US citizens…or will just shouting Allah Akhbar suffice?

coldwarrior on April 30, 2013 at 7:27 PM

Gee…they can finally find a use for all those hollow points the DHS has been stockpiling.

thatsafactjack on April 30, 2013 at 7:28 PM

shotguns???

…just asking….

ted c on April 30, 2013 at 7:25 PM

winner. shut it down.

JusDreamin on April 30, 2013 at 7:28 PM

Sure… it’s easy for Obama to write a check on American tax funds to cover his big mouth and posturing.

thatsafactjack on April 30, 2013 at 7:29 PM

What could go wrong?

Obowma arms the terrorists and unarms the United States…

Seven Percent Solution on April 30, 2013 at 7:29 PM

Arm muslims, disarm Americans!

SouthernGent on April 30, 2013 at 7:31 PM

I believe I heard Iran said they would join the fray.

wolly4321 on April 30, 2013 at 7:31 PM

The United States has two interests in the Syrian civil war:

1) That chemical weapons (or other WMDs) don’t fall into the hands of terrorists
2) That neither side wins, but especially not the jihadists

Needless to say, neither interest is furthered by providing jihadists with American weapons.

DKCZ on April 30, 2013 at 7:31 PM

I can’t help wondering how many of the rebels will end up being granted refugee status and be living in this nation at tax payer expense.

thatsafactjack on April 30, 2013 at 7:32 PM

Oh God no… We’re going to start arming forces complete shot through with al Qaeda and other jihadists. This is going to turn out like 1980s Afghanistan all over again.

My masters, are you mad?

Inkblots on April 30, 2013 at 7:33 PM

Explain something to me. How did we get from “Assad’s chemical weapons must be confiscated” to “we must arm Assad’s opponents”?

We are told that uttering ” Hussein” with his name is racist or islamophobic or something and we comply .
That’s how !

The big takeaway from today’s presser was that Obama himself wouldn’t commit to the idea that it was Assad rather than the rebels who are responsible for the previous chemical incidents in Syria.

Well well well…the WMD story rises again…and this time the lapdogs will tell us that this POTUS is telling the truth …
America is going to war people …yyyyeeeaaahhh…

burrata on April 30, 2013 at 7:33 PM

Explain something to me. How did we get from “Assad’s chemical weapons must be confiscated” to “we must arm Assad’s opponents”?

That philosophy is called, “keeping your hands clean.”

That’s not the actual result, mind.

Axe on April 30, 2013 at 7:34 PM

Arm muslims, disarm Americans!

SouthernGent on April 30, 2013 at 7:31 PM

Kill Christians everywhere !!

burrata on April 30, 2013 at 7:34 PM

Gee…they can finally find a use for all those hollow points the DHS has been stockpiling.

thatsafactjack on April 30, 2013 at 7:28 PM

I can’t help wondering how many of the rebels will end up being granted refugee status and be living in this nation at tax payer expense.

thatsafactjack on April 30, 2013 at 7:32 PM

Feeling a bit . . . whatever that’s called, I see. :)

Axe on April 30, 2013 at 7:35 PM

Obowma arms the terrorists and unarms the United States…

Shotguns are okay for us per Biden and Clinton, but the terro, er, freedom fighters deserve better…..maybe, say a dozen or so Abrams and a couple dozen more Bradleys for good measure for them and scads of small arms, ammo and camo bdus to accessorize.

Its all good, these are surplus materials anyway….they’d just be rusting or rotting away in some scrapyard or warehouse.

hawkeye54 on April 30, 2013 at 7:36 PM

It’s only about 150 miles between Iran and Syria along the border with Turkey/Iraq.

wolly4321 on April 30, 2013 at 7:36 PM

OBAMA IS A WARMONGER!!!!!!

#obamatheneocon

#caliphateman

#muslimsympathizer

#ovalofficejihadi

#jordanyourenext

PappyD61 on April 30, 2013 at 7:37 PM

Obama…trying to write his name in history…with the blood of Americans.

Keerist, I loathe that man.

coldwarrior on April 30, 2013 at 7:38 PM

I can’t help wondering how many of the rebels will end up being granted refugee status and be living in this nation at tax payer expense.

Tens of thousands. Many already inquiring on State Dept website for details, just in case.

hawkeye54 on April 30, 2013 at 7:38 PM

I loathe this rat-bastard….

ladyingray on April 30, 2013 at 7:38 PM

Hey maybe Hussein and Holder are running chemical weapons too for jihadies , but our Ambassador died in Benghazi so we’ll never know :(

burrata on April 30, 2013 at 7:38 PM

The time has come for us to leave Muslim countries to their own devices. If they wish to civilize, I wish them all the best.

We tried supporting dictators and that didn’t work. We tried supporting democracy, that didn’t work. We tried nation building, and that didn’t work.

Homer Simpson summed it up precisely: We tried our best and failed miserably.

The lesson is: ‘Never try.’

Not caring about what happens in the Muslim world is a cathartic and liberating experience. You should try it.

If a country can’t protect our embassy, the answer is to close the embassy. If a country takes $1 billion of our dollars, and then returns the favor by indicting our citizens for religious “crimes”, then stop giving them money.

If the Muslim world wishes to join the 21st century, I wish them all the luck in the world.

But if they don’t? It’s not my problem. I just don’t care anymore.

I don’t care about nation building in Afghanistan anymore. I don’t care about the Muslim Brotherhood being in power in Egypt anymore. Let al Qaeda take over Tunisia. I. Just. Don’t. Care.

Our foreign policy towards the Muslim world should simply be this:

Leave us the f*ck alone, if you don’t we will utterly annihilate you. We will not invade. We will not depose. We will not nation build. We will destroy.

And if after being destroyed you choose to f*ck with us again, we will destroy you again. Until either you stop f*cking with us or you are all dead.

The nuclear option is on the table.

We will put no more American lives at risk to give you freedom. American freedom was won by American blood. Afghan freedom will be won by Afghan blood. Iraqi freedom will be won by Iraqi blood. Etc.

I’ve had it. I’m checking out. It’s not my problem anymore. Call me when you’ve matured. I’m moving on.

So long Muslim world, and thanks for all the fish!

By Rusty Shackleford, Ph.D.

Resist We Much on April 30, 2013 at 7:39 PM

ladyingray on April 30, 2013 at 7:38 PM

I hear ya.

coldwarrior on April 30, 2013 at 7:39 PM

Will the arms contain more than six rounds per magazine?

RovesChins on April 30, 2013 at 7:40 PM

At least the administration that armed Mexican drug cartels and Libyan Islamists is being consistent in its idiocy.

Socratease on April 30, 2013 at 7:40 PM

Axe on April 30, 2013 at 7:35 PM

Yes. I am.

More American blood and treasure wasted on people who are MAD WITH BLOOD LUST.

It makes me sick to contemplate it.

I’m beginning to wonder if this entire debacle in the Middle East isn’t really aimed at ‘redistribution of wealth’ since it now appears that we are actually backing those who commit the terrorist atrocities against which we moved to wage a ‘war on terror’.

How many trillions of dollars have we spent, to date, in that arena of madness? It’s like we just opened up the spigot and let the cash flow…to places we never would have dedicated that much cash under any other circumstance than war.

Now we can add Syria to that rapidly lengthening list.

thatsafactjack on April 30, 2013 at 7:44 PM

He’s supporting more islamists?
Figgers. ///

annoyinglittletwerp on April 30, 2013 at 7:44 PM

By Rusty Shackleford, Ph.D.

Resist We Much on April 30, 2013 at 7:39 PM

http://predicthistunpredictpast.blogspot.com/2012/09/so-long-muslim-world-and-thanks-for-all.html

Axe on April 30, 2013 at 7:44 PM

Will the arms contain more than six rounds per magazine?

RovesChins on April 30, 2013 at 7:40 PM

Ofcourse , jihadies around the world deserve the best weapons and ammunitions Amrican taxpayer money can provide for them .
To do otherwise would be islamophobic.
Amd Hussein and Holder anin’t no islamophobes :O

burrata on April 30, 2013 at 7:45 PM

The Obama Jihad

FloatingRock on April 30, 2013 at 7:46 PM

I’m beginning to wonder if this entire debacle in the Middle East isn’t really aimed at ‘redistribution of wealth’ since it now appears that we are actually backing those who commit the terrorist atrocities against which we moved to wage a ‘war on terror’.

How many trillions of dollars have we spent, to date, in that arena of madness? It’s like we just opened up the spigot and let the cash flow…to places we never would have dedicated that much cash under any other circumstance than war.

Now we can add Syria to that rapidly lengthening list.

thatsafactjack on April 30, 2013 at 7:44 PM

“Mutually assured economic destruction.” L2G could talk about that one. And agreed — Global Warming Climate Change, so much of this — moving around the ducats.

Axe on April 30, 2013 at 7:46 PM

The only way is to make a deal with the rebels that we’ll give them conventional weapons now in return for them giving us Assad’s chemical weapons later once they’ve taken over. You trust them to honor a deal like that, don’t you?

Sure they will. Barry only dabbles in “Smart Diplomacy”. It worked out so well in Egypt and Tunisia.

GarandFan on April 30, 2013 at 7:46 PM

I can’t help wondering how many of the rebels will end up being granted refugee status and be living in this nation at tax payer expense.

Tens of thousands. Many already inquiring on State Dept website for details, just in case.

hawkeye54 on April 30, 2013 at 7:38 PM

And I’ll bet they all bring high capacity assault pressure cookers with them….

dentarthurdent on April 30, 2013 at 7:46 PM

If we had tanks at Al Qaim, and a carrier group off the coast of Lebanon, never would have even began.

wolly4321 on April 30, 2013 at 7:47 PM

Sooooooooooo…

… What poor fool is going to ‘give’ them the actual weapons, and what are his orders?

Seven Percent Solution on April 30, 2013 at 7:52 PM

Each crate of weapons will have the following stencil: “From your friend, Nobel Peace Prize winner Bark Obama”.

Bishop on April 30, 2013 at 7:53 PM

So when these weapons show up on Israel’s border or in ‘crime scenes’ in America like ‘Fast and Furious’…

… Is that when the first gay Football player will come out of the closet?

Seven Percent Solution on April 30, 2013 at 7:54 PM

Seven Percent Solution on April 30, 2013 at 7:52 PM

Last time the orders were, “Go to Benghazi, and don’t draw attention to yourself, so leave the Sec detachment back in Tripoli, so as not to offend them…”

The rest was too charred to read…

coldwarrior on April 30, 2013 at 7:56 PM

That’s a Peace Prize!!!

How many does he have now???

Funny how no one brings that up anymore…

Go Nobel!! Other than the million $, yer prize is for $hit…..

BigWyo on April 30, 2013 at 7:57 PM

He’s not going to send them high-capacity magazines though, right?

catmman on April 30, 2013 at 7:58 PM

I am sooooo ready to check out of following the news cycles for awhile.
Methinks my sanity could depend on it. Oy.
Just give me a Gosnell (et al) conviction to take with me, k?
Weary.

pambi on April 30, 2013 at 7:59 PM

I finally figured out why Obama had the presser today — the WH’s attempt to gauge the media’s mood on certain issues.

mjbrooks3 on April 30, 2013 at 8:03 PM

Are the people getting the guns going to need background checks?

malclave on April 30, 2013 at 8:04 PM

If I were Israeli, I think I’d be about tired of barkys bullsh!t.

wolly4321 on April 30, 2013 at 8:05 PM

He’s not going to send them high-capacity magazines though, right?

catmman on April 30, 2013 at 7:58 PM

That’s gives me a kind of funny idea. :) In a ripping your hair out sort of way:

“Americans, turn in your right-wing Koch-brother double-ungood assault magazines.”

*crate up magazines*

*ship magazines*

Axe on April 30, 2013 at 8:10 PM

If Obama gets us involved in another war, must Obama give back his Nobel Peace Prize?

joecollins on April 30, 2013 at 8:12 PM

Pambi- this is just the start. Sorry. But I hear ya. Me too.

We haven’t heard barkys reincarnation of “a day that will live in infamy” before he throws the war and prays 5 times.

I’ll be long dead before this plays out.

wolly4321 on April 30, 2013 at 8:14 PM

Can we contact the British Embassy in DC, have them make a request of Queen Elizabeth…ask her to announce that Obama, if he tries to arm the jihadis, will be granted a British Knighthood or some other bauble and ribbon for his Valor.

Obama will stop this arming Syria nonsense in a New York minute…hates the Brits so much…

Just might work.

coldwarrior on April 30, 2013 at 8:15 PM

Are the people getting the guns going to need background checks?

malclave on April 30, 2013 at 8:04 PM

Saying ‘Papers, please’ would be all racist, Islamophobic, xenophobic, hatey, and fascisti-like, dontcha know?

Resist We Much on April 30, 2013 at 8:16 PM

Maybe offer him a rank in the QAR??

coldwarrior on April 30, 2013 at 8:16 PM

After arming Mexican cartels and attempting to disarm law abiding American citizens, this move seems like the next logical step.

antipc on April 30, 2013 at 8:19 PM

Seriously,, if you’re in Israel, do you want this? We are arming who?

the MB? Al qaueda?

wolly4321 on April 30, 2013 at 8:27 PM

Putin and Iamanutjob are laughing their asses off.
They will supply Assad at 3-4 times the level
Obama can supply his Muslim brothers.

redguy on April 30, 2013 at 8:31 PM

I just heard this on the radio coming home from work. The bat face is giving body armor and night vision equipment to the rebels.

tom daschle concerned on April 30, 2013 at 8:31 PM

They can kill infidels with them, of course.

Philly on April 30, 2013 at 8:33 PM

How do Lebanon and Jordan play in to this? Turkey helped smuggle weapons via Libya.

wolly4321 on April 30, 2013 at 8:33 PM

By Rusty Shackleford, Ph.D.

Resist We Much on April 30, 2013 at 7:39 PM

I’d like to see an honest poll done on that statement. Even a HA poll. Speaks for me.

bluefox on April 30, 2013 at 8:34 PM

Isn’t this how B.O. started in Libya and the Egypt? I think he may be biting off more than he can chew this time. He’ll find out that the world doesn’t revolve around him after all.

bluefox on April 30, 2013 at 8:36 PM

Why? The ME is awash in ‘lethal’ weapons. This is nothing more than FnF with a visa.

Limerick on April 30, 2013 at 8:43 PM

Meh. We’ve been arming them since the start. What do you think Benghazi was all about?

And in a weird, sick way, this action will kind of vindicate Hillary’s famous quote “What Difference Does It Make”.

bofh on April 30, 2013 at 9:39 PM

Here we go: Obama preparing to send “lethal arms” to Syrian rebels, say senior admin officials

Instead of “non-lethal” arms, such as tasers, or something?

The socialists in the WH have so internalized Orwellian obfuscation it has become their normal way of speaking outside the walls of the WH. They do it even when they do not have to.

farsighted on April 30, 2013 at 9:44 PM

The big takeaway from today’s presser was that Obama himself wouldn’t commit to the idea that it was Assad rather than the rebels who are responsible for the previous chemical incidents in Syria.

So obviously the solution is to give the rebels, who may have used chemical weapons, “lethal arms”, right?

Even Orwell himself might have trouble deciphering the twisted logic behind that one.

farsighted on April 30, 2013 at 9:47 PM

The big takeaway from today’s presser was that Obama himself wouldn’t commit to the idea that it was Assad rather than the rebels who are responsible for the previous chemical incidents in Syria.

So obviously the solution is to give the rebels, who may have used chemical weapons, “lethal arms”, right?

Even Orwell himself might have trouble deciphering the twisted logic behind that one.

farsighted on April 30, 2013 at 9:47 PM

Do we think the REB has learned a lesson in diplomacy about drawing red lines?

Naah.

slickwillie2001 on April 30, 2013 at 10:31 PM

Like I said in the earlier Syria thread:

Libya worked out so well: I say we partner with AQ-affiliated Islamists again. What could go wrong?

C’mon, it’s not like arming them would destabilize neighboring countries or a region.

batter on May 1, 2013 at 1:05 AM

Arm muslims, disarm Americans!

SouthernGent on April 30, 2013 at 7:31 PM

Obama’s de facto Agenda.

Tipped off by his U.N. Benghazi blusterfest:

The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam.”

He should have been thrown out of office for that bizarre utterance alone.

A quip which demonstrated that he is either- a traitorous Quisling or- simply non compos mentis.

Obama~

The Non sequitur of the Century.

profitsbeard on May 1, 2013 at 2:49 AM

So, he’s not sending those non-lethal skeet shotguns? The Syrian people are saved!

PXCharon on May 1, 2013 at 3:00 AM

Arm the jihadis…no surprise there.

Is the Administration going to do background checks…like they are demanding here, for US citizens…or will just shouting Allah Akhbar suffice?

coldwarrior on April 30, 2013 at 7:27 PM

Imperious Reader, Zero the first, is schitso.

dogsoldier on May 1, 2013 at 6:02 AM

Schizo, sorry spelling

dogsoldier on May 1, 2013 at 6:03 AM

Brilliant idea wanting to send arms to the very people that want to kill us.

sadatoni on May 1, 2013 at 7:07 AM

“The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam.”

A quip which demonstrated that he is either- a traitorous Quisling or- simply non compos mentis.

profitsbeard on May 1, 2013 at 2:49 AM

Or more cunning than we thought, because in order to slander somebody your spoken statements about somebody must disparage them and be false.

Reporting that “the Prophet of Islam” had penetrative sex with a small girl, acted vindictively, was ignorant, violent and deceitful isn’t slander, because to the best of all available knowledge it’s the truth.

In order to slander the Barbarian of Arabia you’d have to accuse him of some wickedness he never did … cheating at cards, or riding his camel recklessly the wrong way along a one-way dune, perhaps?

YiZhangZhe on May 1, 2013 at 7:26 AM

STAY OUT OF IT!!!

Big John on May 1, 2013 at 12:45 PM