UK drew up plans to train and equip a 100,000-strong Syrian rebel army in 2012, but then they were l - Polidicks

[img]http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/76035000/jpg/_76035363_76035135.jpg[/img] [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28148943[/url] [quote]The UK drew up plans to train and equip a 100,000-strong Syrian rebel army to defeat President Bashar al-Assad, BBC Newsnight can reveal. The secret initiative, put forward two years ago, was the brainchild of the then most senior UK military officer, General Sir David Richards. It was considered by the PM and the National Security Council, as well as US officials, but was deemed too risky. The UK government did not respond to a request for comment. ... While it was thought to be too radical at the time, US President Barack Obama said last week he was seeking $500m (£291m) funding to train Syrian rebels - an echo of Lord Richards' plan. Insiders have told BBC Newsnight that Lord Richards, then chief of the defence staff but since retired from the military, warned Downing Street there were only two ways to end the Syrian civil war quickly - to let President Assad win, or to defeat him. With ministers having pledged not to commit British "boots on the ground", his initiative proposed vetting and training a substantial army of moderate Syrian rebels at bases in Turkey and Jordan. Mr Cameron was told the "extract, equip, train" plan would involve an international coalition. It would take a year, but this would buy time for an alternative Syrian government to be formed in exile, the PM was told. Once the Syrian force was ready, it would march on Damascus, with the cover of fighter jets from the West and Gulf allies. The plan envisaged a "shock and awe" campaign, similar to the one that routed Saddam's military in 2003, but spearheaded by Syrians.[/quote] TLDR the plan was to recruit 100,000 Syrians, take them out of the country, train them for 12 months, then send them into Syria backed by international air strikes

I think its for the best that we didn't. Our interference in the middle east has caused these problems. From unfair division of the area and lying to our arab allies. To encouraging Wahhabi extremism To making israel To ruining democracy in Iran To funding the mujhadeen To funding warlords in afghanistan To setting up shia militant torture groups in iraq To installing corrupt regimes To the rise of private armies with unregulated, egotistical, inconsiderate, violent mercenaries. That plan would just contribute to this long sad history of mistakes.

[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;45285433]I think its for the best that we didn't. Our interference in the middle east has caused these problems. From unfair division of the area and lying to our arab allies. To encouraging Wahhabi extremism To making israel To ruining democracy in Iran To funding the mujhadeen To funding warlords in afghanistan To setting up shia militant torture groups in iraq To installing corrupt regimes To the rise of private armies with unregulated, egotistical, inconsiderate, violent mercenaries. That plan would just contribute to this long sad history of mistakes.[/QUOTE] Is it better for the middle east to just let governments gas minorities and use chemical weapons against rebels, kill political prisoners, annex weaker countries, discriminate heavily against women and let extremist movements grow relatively unchecked, though? Not taking action also has its downsides, and we have no idea what kind of kind of things the middle east could grow into if left undisturbed.

[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;45285433]I think its for the best that we didn't. Our interference in the middle east has caused these problems. From unfair division of the area and lying to our arab allies. To encouraging Wahhabi extremism To making israel To ruining democracy in Iran To funding the mujhadeen To funding warlords in afghanistan To setting up shia militant torture groups in iraq To installing corrupt regimes To the rise of private armies with unregulated, egotistical, inconsiderate, violent mercenaries. That plan would just contribute to this long sad history of mistakes.[/QUOTE] It was doing nothing about Syria that let ISIS get as strong as it is now. We could have done something like we did with Libya but instead it was all vetoed and we let the Syrian rebels fall into terrorist control and now they're creating their own state which doesn't bode well to anyone.

[QUOTE=Electrocuter;45285642]It was doing nothing about Syria that let ISIS get as strong as it is now. We could have done something like we did with Libya but instead it was all vetoed and we let the Syrian rebels fall into terrorist control and now they're creating their own state which doesn't bode well to anyone.[/QUOTE] Assad wins.

[QUOTE=Electrocuter;45285642]It was doing nothing about Syria that let ISIS get as strong as it is now. We could have done something like we did with Libya but instead it was all vetoed and we let the Syrian rebels fall into terrorist control and now they're creating their own state which doesn't bode well to anyone.[/QUOTE] It would probably have fallen into terrorist hands anyways after intervening.

[QUOTE=Electrocuter;45285642]It was doing nothing about Syria that let ISIS get as strong as it is now. We could have done something like we did with Libya but instead it was all vetoed and we let the Syrian rebels fall into terrorist control and now they're creating their own state which doesn't bode well to anyone.[/QUOTE] Afghanistan - Widespread corruption, legalised rape, warlords (many a warecriminals) protected by the law, all because of us the west. Iraq - The current crisis obviously. OTher than that widespread corruption, counter insurgency units utilising rape, murder and torture, these are the shia militias people talk about. Libya - A mass of militias roving around trying to carve up a country Iran - when we toppled the elected leader who was trying to get a fair deal on oil, we put in a dictator he did all that gassing stuff you walk about. I see our other interventions went well.

is this image still relevant? [t]http://i.imgur.com/zHQiVp8.jpg[/t]