Why is the US protecting Al Qaeda-linked rebels in Syria?

[Redwoods Red]

http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-mideast-crisis-syria-sanctions-idUKKCN0Y22F6

U.S., Britain, France block Russia bid to blacklist Syria rebels

Britain, the United States, France and Ukraine blocked a Russian proposal at the United Nations to blacklist Syrian rebel groups Jaish al-Islam and Ahrar al-Sham for links to Islamic State and al Qaeda militants, diplomats said on Wednesday.

Russia made the proposal late last month and the U.S. mission to the United Nations had signalled it would oppose the move, saying it would undermine attempts to get a sustained halt in the fighting in Syria.

<snip>

Jaish al-Islam (Islam Army) is a major armed rebel group in Syria and part of the High Negotiation Committee, which was set up in Riyadh last December to negotiate on behalf of opposition groups at U.N.-brokered peace talks with the government.

The High Negotiation Committee is backed by Western nations and key Arab states.

<snip>

Ahrar al-Sham is an ultra-orthodox Salafist group and has fought as part of a military alliance including the al Qaeda-linked Nusra Front, which was not part of a cessation of hostilities agreement brokered in February. Ahrar al-Sham, whose late leader fought alongside Osama bin Laden, last year denied sharing al Qaeda's ideology or having organizational ties to the group.

-----------

These guys are the soul brothers of ISIS and Al Qaeda.

[moondust]

1. Does anybody really know who's who there?

[Redwoods Red]

4. It is confusing, with many players, but it can be followed.

Damascus-Baghdad-Russians-Iranians-Hezbollah

vs.

Syrian Sunnis-Saudis-Qataris-Turks-Americans

vs.

ISIS-Al Nusra-Al Qaeda-various Salafist armed formations

[leveymg]

7. Past line one, that's all scrambled up

Move America to its own row, with the other European post-colonial powers.

Move ISIS and the others in row three up into row two, so they can be with their creators and benefactors.

Add Israel on its own row, as it pursues its own agenda of pitting all the rest against each other.

[Redwoods Red]

8. I hear you, but...

I'm not willing to go as far as saying we deliberately created ISIS, et al. They emerged as a result of our policies in the region, yes. What we ascribe to brilliant scheming may in fact be ignorant bumbling.

And the US is bombing the shit out of ISIS. At the same time we're playing footsie with its comrades in arms.

[leveymg]

13. I would say we allowed KSA and the Gulf states to create AQ/al Nusra/ISIS

More a crime of omission on our part. But for the Wahabis, Jihad against the Shiia and secular Baathist states is an ongoing mission from above, and fueling that religious war has simply been viewed as a twofer by the neocons and interventionists.

[Separation]

9. You forgot a few. :)

There are like 5 different Peshmerga factions fighting. Some against ISIS, some against Iraq, other against Iran and Turkey. I think most of them want an independent country which pits them against Turkey who is a member of NATO which gums up the process even more.

[Redwoods Red]

12. Damn, it's hard to remember everybody.

I'm aware of the PKK and their Syrian affiliates, the YPK (?). The PKK fights the Turks, the YPK is interested in autonomy in northeast Syria. I don't know about any Kurds fighting Iraq (although Iraqi Kurdistan jealously guards its autonomy) or doing any serious fighting against Iran.

[Separation]

14. Yea

Just watched an episode of VICE. They were doing a piece on female Kurdish fighters. It ended up being a puff piece because they basically gave him a guided tour. One of the things they did mention though was them fighting in and against Iran.

[ViseGrip]

2. I guess we have to ask Hillary?

[Odin2005]

3. The world isn't black and white.

And not all Islamists are necessarily anti-American.

[Redwoods Red]

5. The Al Nusra Front is an Al Qaeda affiliate. Pretty sure they're anti-American.

Although they would gladly take weapons from us.

Remember, we're supposed to be hunkered down in a perpetual security lockdown because we're scared of ISIS and Al Qaeda. But we're dealing with/protecting their affiliates in Syria?

[leveymg]

6. But, some of our "allies" in the region will slit our throats at the first opportunity.

Because we didn't go after them for 9/11, assures they'll do it again, and far, far worse.

[Warren Stupidity]

10. Because our policy in the region is seriously fucked.

Our goals of containing Iran and "winning the war on terror" are quite frequently at odds with each other.

[bjo59]

11. Because the whole idea is to do a regime-change on Syria by any means necessary.

How many Americans realize that while the US government has excused its undermining of constitutionally protected civil liberties at home with constant warnings about Al Qaeda, Isis, and other sundry Jihadi groups, it is actually supporting them abroad? All part of the amoral "realism" of the "great game" 21st century style. Kissinger was a world class Machiavellian player of the game and the Obama administration just gave him an award for public service. Because it's the American way. Putin/Russia is the only thing standing in the way of the complete Iraq-i-zation of Syria. And Hillary Clinton's past statements indicate strongly that if she is elected, Iran will be next. Will Russia stand for that? No, of course not. The myriad of articles over past years warning about the possibility of a "WWIII" are not just "crazy talk."