On September 30, just hours after a three star Russian general strolled into the US embassy in Baghdad and told the staff to inform Washington that Moscow would begin airstrikes in Syria “in one hour”, the Western media was alive with accusations that The Kremlin wasn’t targeting ISIS, but rather other, US and Saudi-backed rebel groups fighting Assad’s depleted SAA. Here’s what WSJ said at the time:
Yes, “moderate rebel factions such as the al-Qaeda-affiliated Nusra Front.”“Among seven areas that Syrian state media listed as targets of Russian strikes, only one—an area east of the town of Salamiyah in Hama province—has a known presence of Islamic State fighters. The other areas listed are largely dominated by moderate rebel factions or Islamist groups, such as Ahrar al-Sham and the al Qaeda-affiliated Nusra Front.”
More @ Zero Hedge
This is so wrong.
ReplyDeleteHere I am, helping to pay for them to give out TOWs willy-nilly for free, to whoever promises to use them to commit terrorist acts.
Since I'm helping pay for them, I want a few for myself.
I promise not to use them for terrorist acts against a sovereign nation, but only in defense against a tyrannical government. :)
Heh!
Central Alabamaian
I promise not to use them for terrorist acts against a sovereign nation, but only in defense against a tyrannical government. :)
DeleteWell, the current one certainly is applicable. :)
Exactly! :)
DeleteCentral Alabamaian
".....for anyone who did pick up on the fact that the mainstream US media had just officially (and posthumously) labeled Osama Bin Laden a “moderate”, the farce was complete."
ReplyDeleteThis whole thing makes The Keystone Kops, The Three Stooges, and Laurel and Hardy, all rolled into one, more real than life,
Except, it isn't very funny,.......it's infuriating.
Central Alabamaian
Except, it isn't very funny,.......it's infuriating.
DeletePrecisely