Kerry: We Have to Send Terrorists Into Syria to Make Sure that Chemical Weapons Don’t Fall Into the Hands of Terrorists

From the Makes-No-Sense Department

Huffington Post reports:

In the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing over proposed U.S. intervention in Syria’s civil war, Kerry pointed to the possibility that a cache of chemical weapons could fall into the hands of a terrorist group to make the case for military action.

Sounds reasonable….

But as the New York Times, (and here and here) , Wall Street Journal, USA TodayCNN, McClatchy (and here), AP, Time, Reuters, BBC, the Independent, the Telegraph, Agence France-PresseAsia Times, and the Star (and here) confirm,  supporting the rebels means supporting Al Qaeda and two other terrorist groups. Indeed, the the New York Times has reported that virtually all of the rebel fighters are Al Qaeda terrorists.

These terrorists – who we’ve been supporting supporting for many years – already have access to chemical weapons.

And the United Nations, Haaretz, and Turkish state newspaper Zaman – say that they’ve grabbed them and used them.

Polls show that Americans are opposed to bombing Syria, and even more opposed to arming the rebels.  The Washington post reports today:

Nearly six in 10 oppose missile strikes [even after] the U.S. government’s determination that Syria used chemical weapons against its own people.


The public expresses even wider opposition to arming Syrian rebels, which President Obama authorized in June. Fully seven in 10 oppose arming rebels, including large majorities of Democrats, Republicans and independents.

But the U.S. is now stepping up its support for the Islamic extremists.

As the experience with Libya shows, that will only destabilize the chemical weapons situation.

This entry was posted in Politics / World News. Bookmark the permalink.