Who didn't see this coming: US-trained Syria fighters gave equipment and ammunition to Nusra Front - Polidicks

[QUOTE]The Pentagon has said that a group of US-trained Syrian fighters has handed over ammunition and equipment to al-Nusra Front rebel group, purportedly in exchange for safe passage. The acknowledgement contrasted with earlier denials by the US defence department of reports that some fighters had either defected or handed over gear. "Unfortunately, we learned late today that the NSF (New Syrian Forces) unit now says it did, in fact, provide six pickup trucks and a portion of their ammunition to a suspected al-Nusra Front [group]," Pentagon spokesman Captain Jeff Davis said on Friday. Colonel Patrick Ryder, a spokesman for Central Command, which is overseeing efforts against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), said the fighters had handed over the gear in exchange for safe passage in the Nusra operating area. [B]"If accurate, the report of NSF members providing equipment to al-Nusra Front is very concerning and a violation of Syria "train and equip" programme guidelines," Ryder said.[/B] Ryder added that the pickup vehicles and ammunition represented about 25 percent of the equipment issued to the group by the US-led coalition. "We are using all means at our disposal to look into what exactly happened and determine the appropriate response," Ryder said. A defence official told the AFP news agency that according to the NSF, there had not been any defections, but he stressed: "We only know what they have told us."[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/09/trained-syria-fighters-gave-equipment-nusra-front-150926011820488.html[/url]

Well this certainly puts egg on the face. I'm not sure how much stuff the US gave in terms of numbers, but if 25% is significant to report, then it has to be a large amount of goods.

[QUOTE=Vaught;48767850]Well this certainly puts egg on the face. I'm not sure how much stuff the US gave in terms of numbers, but if 25% is significant to report, then it has to be a large amount of goods.[/QUOTE] [quote]in fact,[B] provide six pickup trucks and a portion of their ammunition[/B][/quote] you overestimate the size of this force... arming and training rebel fighters isn't going to be a way to win this fight, training and arming militias that already exist such as the kurdish forces is about as good as we can hope for

[QUOTE=Sableye;48769854]you overestimate the size of this force... arming and training rebel fighters isn't going to be a way to win this fight, training and arming militias that already exist such as the kurdish forces is about as good as we can hope for[/QUOTE] Even those can be susceptible to switching sides after a while. Probably not the Kurdish forces, but others.

Pickups and some ammunition isn't all that much in the long run, they'll get blown up eventually.

[QUOTE=Da Big Man;48769953]Pickups and some ammunition isn't all that much in the long run, they'll get blown up eventually.[/QUOTE] How sure are you that they'll be destroyed before they're used against the more moderate forces?

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;48770371]How sure are you that they'll be destroyed before they're used against the more moderate forces?[/QUOTE] Well they'll probably either stuff them with guns or bombs, either way vehicles probably don't last long in their service since they have absolutely no control of the skies and plenty of bombs comming

[QUOTE=Sableye;48770390]Well they'll probably either stuff them with guns or bombs, either way vehicles probably don't last long in their service since they have absolutely no control of the skies and plenty of bombs comming[/QUOTE] Majority, if not all, coalition air strikes are against the Islamic State, not al Nursa Front (whom is also opposed to the Islamic State and in a odd sense a pseudo ally despite being fundamentalist trash all the same)

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;48770413]Majority, if not all, coalition air strikes are against the Islamic State, not al Nursa Front (whom is also opposed to the Islamic State and in a odd sense a pseudo ally despite being fundamentalist trash all the same)[/QUOTE]We're also ignoring the SAA and Assad, despite our initial efforts to fund the rebels to fight against him. Man, can you remember when we were saying that this could turn out great? I think you and I were both cautiously optimistic about this, looks like we had good reason for our skepticism. I'm just glad that we didn't just hand over all sorts of military equipment to questionable individuals like we did in the past, I guess we're finally learning our lesson about that.

[QUOTE=Sableye;48769854]training and arming militias that already exist such as the kurdish forces is about as good as we can hope for[/QUOTE] This is all a bad idea. Arms are flowing and making this conflict worse. Hell, even the precious Kurds beloved by everybody have been killing Arabs for being Arab.

[QUOTE=Rangergxi;48770716]This is all a bad idea. Arms are flowing and making this conflict worse. Hell, even the precious Kurds beloved by everybody have been killing Arabs for being Arab.[/QUOTE] No, if anything this conflict has shown is that the middle East culture is the most unsustainable place in the world. I mean they've been at near constant war for 40 years now, Iran and Iraq alone lost an entire generation, Syria threw hundreds of thousands of men at Israel, and lost, Afghanistan has been steadily killing thousands a year since the Afghan war of 1980, at some point they are going to have destroyed or depopulated everything if the current trends of proxy fighting and sectarian conflicts don't let up. I mean the Arab states are doing a lot to fund education, and education brings about social improvements, but the governments of the middle East aren't likely to allow the needed social freedoms to prevent future conflicts either, and they've done nothing to deal with the crippling cycle of unemployment and poverty that drives these people into militias and terrorist groups

They've gotten more from badly placed supply drops then this, some trucks and ammo aren't gonna change anything.

[QUOTE=Sableye;48770807]No, if anything this conflict has shown is that the middle East culture is the most unsustainable place in the world. I mean they've been at near constant war for 40 years now, Iran and Iraq alone lost an entire generation, Syria threw hundreds of thousands of men at Israel, and lost, Afghanistan has been steadily killing thousands a year since the Afghan war of 1980, at some point they are going to have destroyed or depopulated everything if the current trends of proxy fighting and sectarian conflicts don't let up. I mean the Arab states are doing a lot to fund education, and education brings about social improvements, but the governments of the middle East aren't likely to allow the needed social freedoms to prevent future conflicts either, and they've done nothing to deal with the crippling cycle of unemployment and poverty that drives these people into militias and terrorist groups[/QUOTE] The middle east was one of the most stable parts of the whole world before the Turks, then Europeans, walked in and smacked it with a colonial hammer. [editline]27th September 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;48770665]We're also ignoring the SAA and Assad, despite our initial efforts to fund the rebels to fight against him. Man, can you remember when we were saying that this could turn out great? I think you and I were both cautiously optimistic about this, looks like we had good reason for our skepticism. I'm just glad that we didn't just hand over all sorts of military equipment to questionable individuals like we did in the past, I guess we're finally learning our lesson about that.[/QUOTE] I'm pretty sure we were the minority against giving them weapons. It was optimistic enough to assume that equipment wouldn't just outright be captured in battle, let alone not just straight handed over to the people it was meant to kill. And now all we have to show for it is anger from Assad and Moscow for openly giving support to forces against them.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;48770962]The middle east was one of the most stable parts of the whole world before the Turks, then Europeans, walked in and smacked it with a colonial hammer.[/QUOTE] This is a very eurocentric perspective. The history of the region has been plagued with the rise and fall of empires and conflict between small kingdoms. Islamic history alone should make this clear.

So, how many 'US vs US' proxy wars are there now?

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;48770962]The middle east was one of the most stable parts of the whole world before the Turks, then Europeans, walked in and smacked it with a colonial hammer.[/QUOTE] Wasn't the Middle East still dominated by numerous kingdoms and empires fighting each other over land and religious purposes (Shias vs Sunnis) even before the Turks got involved?

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;48770962]The middle east was one of the most stable parts of the whole world before the Turks, then Europeans, walked in and smacked it with a colonial hammer.[/QUOTE] What about the Roman-Sassanian wars, the Arab conquests, the Mongol invasions, etc? Not to mention Sunni-Shia conflicts and the numerous civil wars and the collapse of decadent dynasties.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;48770962]The middle east was [b]one of the most stable parts of the whole world[/b] before the Turks, then Europeans, walked in and smacked it with a colonial hammer. [/QUOTE] That's... really not saying much. Back then being "one of the most stable" meant "civil wars and genocides every 30 years instead of every 10".

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;48770962]I'm pretty sure we were the minority against giving them weapons. It was optimistic enough to assume that equipment wouldn't just outright be captured in battle, let alone not just straight handed over to the people it was meant to kill. And now all we have to show for it is anger from Assad and Moscow for openly giving support to forces against them.[/QUOTE]I recall being enthusiastic for supporting the Kurdish forces, though at the time they were very removed from the fighting and we've historically had a great relationship with them. (or at least they were always very supportive toward us, even the leftist factions were somewhat okay with us) Supporting the FSA when it was in it's infancy was something I was all for, but then things spiraled out of control and I became suspicious of that. Honestly I think the big problem is we didn't throw down the cards and support the FSA as a political entity immediately, they likely could have been convinced to keep the hardline religious nutters out of their ranks with the threat of ending our support. I mean they'd likely get addicted to all the cool shit we could provide them (obsolete equipment of course, but still better than what they had) and likely could have influenced policy that way. Problem is I think we were cautious of doing that because of our experience with the Iraqi government. We had put in a real effort to build them up but the historical corruption persisted and we ended up with the Iraqi people electing a crooked son of a bitch. Afghanistan sort of went the same way, but even though everyone expected Afghanistan to collapse immediately after we left they've largely been holding their own. I bet nobody in the ANA still can't do a jumping jack to save their life though.

Glad to see that American is accomplishing something in the middle east. (but not really)

First with Talibans, now with ISIS. How many fucking savages has U.S helped?