Assad is finished! US gov to arm Syrian rebels

[Titanium]

They funded and aided the terrorists in Libya and in Afghanistan during the Soviet occupation.

And they can't do it now?

Salafi nonsense.

[hargaysaay]

grandpa the syrian rebels are composed of 10s of units and divisions spread all across the country but there are few heavy weights that make a difference in any battle with ASSAD

Al Nusra(syrias alqaida) active mostly in the provinces of idlib, allepo, deir a zour, and the so called cradle of the revolution the southern most povince of Daraa
Liwaa Al Tawhiid(the muslim brotherhood military wing in syria) they are the largest rebel unit in allepo
Ahrar Al sham(radical salafist) active mostly in the northern parts of the country
Suquur Al Sham( another bona fide radical lunatics) active mostly in Allepo and Allepo
Liwaa Al Islaam(hard line salafist)n they are the biggest rebel unit fighting in damascus
AL farouq( moderate islamists) this division is the only one that resembles of whats left of the FSA they were the ones doing most of the fighting in Qusayr they are active through out HOMS and are led mostly by former defected government officers at one time they were headed by Abdirizaak Al Talaas nephew of syrias long time former defense
minister.

so there you go sxb are there moderate Fsa fighters still left you betcha but they dont even make up 30 percent of the fighting opposition forces.

[misterioso]

They funded and aided the terrorists in Libya and in Afghanistan during the Soviet occupation.

And they can't do it now?

Salafi nonsense.

Al-Qaeda wasn't a "terrorist" organization during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. If the US funded the terrorists in Libya, why did they kill the US ambassador? You aren't making sense.

[hargaysaay]

They funded and aided the terrorists in Libya and in Afghanistan during the Soviet occupation.

And they can't do it now?

Salafi nonsense.

it would be preferably better if you use the term radical salafist as opposed to salafi, being salafi is not a bad thing its turning into lunatic while claiming one we are against.

[grandpakhalif]

They funded and aided the terrorists in Libya and in Afghanistan during the Soviet occupation.

And they can't do it now?

Salafi nonsense.

I notice you keep repeating? Salafi *insert insult here* interesting.

Anyways, your beloved shia will feel the heat in the coming months, and will be exterminated inshallah. May God ressurect you with the ones who insult our mother Aisha(ra)

[hargaysaay]

They funded and aided the terrorists in Libya and in Afghanistan during the Soviet occupation.

And they can't do it now?

Salafi nonsense.

Al-Qaeda wasn't a "terrorist" organization during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. If the US funded the terrorists in Libya, why did they kill the US ambassador? You aren't making sense.

these numskulls fighting in syria would do the same to any us official had the chance present its self, the radicals are prone to biting the hand that feeds them they just cant help it

[grandpakhalif]

Hargaysaay, you sound a little bitter, I feel the Islamist domination has stirred alot of hatred in you sxb, it's no wonder your backing the brutal Assad/Shia axis, but they will lose.

[misterioso]

these numskulls fighting in syria would do the same to any us official had the chance present its self, the radicals are prone to biting the hand that feeds them they just cant help it

So, why would the US would still arm them, as some here claim?

[hargaysaay]

Hargaysaay, you sound a little bitter, I feel the Islamist domination has stirred alot of hatred in you sxb, it's no wonder your backing the brutal Assad/Shia axis, but they will lose.

all the groups ive laid down in that post are either Al Qaida, radical hopelessly lunatic salafist or muslim brotherhood and i dont trust any of them.

[grandpakhalif]

It doesn't matter what you think of them, it matters what the Sunni Syrian majority thinks of them, and if they support them there's not a rat's ass you can do about it.

[Titanium]

Al-Qaeda wasn't a "terrorist" organization during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. If the US funded the terrorists in Libya, why did they kill the US ambassador? You aren't making sense.

Because the terrorists are backstabbers without principle. That's why. They will accept Western aid and help but will kill them later. Are you denying now that the US didn't fund and aid the Libyan rebels, many of whom were Salafi terrorists? Really? Were you asleep during the almost year-long NATO military intervention of Libya? The terrorist brigades within the Free Libyan Army received Western and American assistance.

it would be preferably better if you use the term radical salafist as opposed to salafi, being salafi is not a bad thing its turning into lunatic while claiming one we are against.

Okay

Anyways, your beloved shia will feel the heat in the coming months, and will be exterminated inshallah. May God ressurect you with the ones who insult our mother Aisha(ra)

You as well as the Western stooges lack any principle. The Shia are the ones who care for the Ummah while you receive military aid from the enemy to kill fellow Muslims. Unprincipled terrorists have shamed us.

[hargaysaay]

these numskulls fighting in syria would do the same to any us official had the chance present its self, the radicals are prone to biting the hand that feeds them they just cant help it

So, why would the US would still arm them, as some here claim?

the balance of the conflict has drastically changed in the last couple of weeks in favor of the government thanks to fall of qusair, the US unsurprisingly would rather see medieval aged syria runned by big bearded thugs than a strong independent syria runned by Assad. simple

[grandpakhalif]

You have yet to prove "Salafi Islamists" are receiving any weapons from the US, who deemed a large portion of them terrorist groups. You are a fool who actually believes Shia propaganda that they are "defenders of the Ummah" and other empty threats. What's the difference between Russian-Iranian-China axis and Saudi-Qatar-US axis? I guess only the West are infidels according to you and Russians aren't.

[hargaysaay]

You have yet to prove "Salafi Islamists" are receiving any weapons from the US, who deemed a large portion of them terrorist groups. You are a fool who actually believes Shia propaganda that they are "defenders of the Ummah" and other empty threats. What's the difference between Russian-Iranian-China axis and Saudi-Qatar-US axis? I guess only the West are infidels according to you and Russians aren't.

russians are orthodox christians or RUUM as mentioned in the quran and according to the holy quran also in the end times muslims and Ruum( russia) will align against some evil power( i cant remember) but obviously its the west

[misterioso]

Are you denying now that the US didn't fund and aid the Libyan rebels, many of whom were Salafi terrorists? Really?

The Libyan rebels didn't need funding or arming, as arms/weapons from the late Gaddaffi's stockpile was awash and easily available. This is common knowledge you either don't know or chose to ignore. You might want to check this recent article on where from the "terrorists" acquired arms/weapons:

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/06/11 ... urface-to/