======================================================================
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
======================================================================


Thank you Michael for clearing that up. We should also note that while the
nationalist forces have received a handful of TOWs the ban on MANPADS
remains in force even as Assad has stepped up his air campaign against
civilians. And even as US and allies enter Syrian skies, nothing like a
no-fly zone is in the works. Assad was comfortable barrel bombing Syrians
on the ground THAT VERY SAME DAY, without US interference.

And once again David shows how these "anti-imperialists" will grasp at a
tiny grain of truth to promote a despicable lie.

Clay Claiborne, Director
Vietnam: American Holocaust <http://VietnamAmericanHolocaust.com>
Linux Beach Productions
Venice, CA 90291
(310) 581-1536

Read my blogs at the Linux Beach <http://claysbeach.blogspot.com/>
<http://wlcentral.org/user/2965/track>

On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 10:39 AM, Michael Karadjis via Marxism <
marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote:

> ======================================================================
> Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> ======================================================================
>
>
> The article says "Moderate groups, starved of proper equipment for over
> three years, began to receive small
> numbers of advanced weapons in spring and summer 2014."
>
> Yes, we know. It is widely known that the very first US weapons in the
> entire war, these handful of TOWs, began arriving for some select FSA
> groups in April 2014. What most of us have written about, that the FSA was
> "starved of proper equipment for over three years," is shown here to be
> correct.
>
> The US began to send some TOWs to select groups in the context of the
> FSA's magnificent attack on ISIS from January 2014. The US had always
> insisted the FSA had to first attack ISIS *and Nusra* before the US would
> consider sending any arms. The FSA had always refused to be the Sawha. But
> since ISIS fascism became unbearable, the FSA and its allies decided, based
> on their own needs and not those of the US, to launch a frontal attack on
> ISIS (but not on Nusra, which in fact joined the FSA/IF attack on ISIS).
>
> The US decided it was time to test them out. The TOWs were never very many
> (here's a good article on the reality of these shipments:
> http://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-syria-
> harakat-hazm-20140907-story.html#page=1); in some cases the US tried to
> get them to attack Nusra as well as ISIS, but they refused; in other cases
> they explicitly gave them weapons to fight ISIS *but not the regime* (I
> have documented all this here: http://mkaradjis.wordpress.
> com/2014/06/25/iraq-and-syria-the-struggle-against-the-
> multi-sided-counterrevolution/).
>
> The outcome? Nearly all these groups that go a few TOWs have condemned the
> current US bombing of Syria as an attack on the revolution, and stand in
> solidarity (even if holding their noses) with Nusra. Above all, the
> 7000-strong FSA militia Harakat Hazm - the first to famously receive TOWS,
> discussed in that LA Times piece I just linked to, came out with the best
> and strongest anti-imperialist statement condemning the US bombings (see my
> new article detailing the reactions of the bulk of FSA and allied rebel
> units to these strikes: http://mkaradjis.wordpress.
> com/2014/09/25/syrian-rebels-overwhelmingly-condemn-us-
> bombing-as-an-attack-on-revolution/).
>
> Revolutionaries that face the actual heat of the double battle against a
> fascist regime that dwarfs most of the Latin American tyrants of the
> 1970s-1980s and a clerical-fascist ISIS, who have to make real decisions in
> these circumstances, receive a handful of half-useful arms after being
> "starved" of them for years against such massively armed opponents, and
> then when the US attacks their country "to help them" they take a
> principled revolutionary stance. Meanwhile other "revolutionaries" who have
> never had to make these kinds of decisions in their lives and never will
> content themselves with sitting back and condemning the revolutionaries in
> Syria for dirtying their hands by finally receiving a little something
> (never mind that what they need for defense against the regime's mostly air
> war is Manpads, which the US Congress explicitly forbade sending, whereas
> TOWs could only be useful against ISIS).
>
> We've come a long way when that is the distinction between revolutionaries
> and "revolutionaries". Or perhaps David didn't really mean it in the way
> his contribution came across. I'll got for the second option.
>
> MK
>
> -----Original Message----- From: DW via Marxism
> Sent: Saturday, September 27, 2014 1:03 AM
> To: Michael Karadjis
> Subject: [Marxism] The Resilience of Moderate Syrian Rebels
>
>
> ======================================================================
> Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> ======================================================================
>
>
> I suggest readers of this list go to this link and download this small PDF.
> What it argues contridicts many of those on this list that say the FSA and
> other rebels don't receive US arms. In fact, they are receiving in
> *effective quantities* TOW anti-tank missiles. These are sophisticated wire
> guided anti-tank weapons that can destroy any tank in existence and
> according the paper pointed to by Louis, the Rebels are getting training
> from outside of Syria and coming back in and used to blow up Syrain gov't
> armor (perhaps ISIS armor as well?). The authors are gushing at the support
> they are reciving. These weapons have to be supplied by the US and training
> no doubt takes place in Turkey under NATO oversight (that's an assumption
> on my part). But the paper says this:
>
> "To ensure complete control over these weapons, donors are brought together
> in the Military Operation Command (MOC)18 based in Turkey and Jordan, and
> deal directly with the brigades of their choosing, bypassing the political
> and military leadership of the opposition."
>
> Of course the paper could be a pro-Assad hoax to show the rebels getting
> US/EU support but I think not. Thanks Louis for posting this.
>
> David
> ________________________________________________
> Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
> Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/mkaradjis%
> 40gmail.com
> ________________________________________________
> Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
> Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/clayclai%
> 40gmail.com
>
________________________________________________
Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to