AP Sources: US Leaning Toward OK On Lethal Aid To Syrian Rebels This Week; No-Fly Zone Unclear

[Purveyor]

Moved by the Assad regime's rapid advance, the Obama administration could decide this week to approve lethal aid for the beleaguered Syrian rebels and will weigh the merits of a less likely move to send in U.S. airpower to enforce a no-fly zone over the civil war-wracked nation, officials said Sunday.

White House meetings are planned over the coming days, as Syrian President Bashar Assad's government forces are apparently poised for an attack on the key city of Homs, which could cut off Syria's armed opposition from the south of the country. As many as 5,000 Hezbollah fighters are now in Syria, officials believe, helping the regime press on with its campaign after capturing the town of Qusair near the Lebanese border last week.

Opposition leaders have warned Washington that their rebellion could face devastating and irreversible losses without greater support, and the warnings are prompting the United States to consider drastic action.

Secretary of State John Kerry postponed a planned trip Monday to Israel and three other Mideast countries to participate in White House discussions, said officials who weren't authorized to speak publicly on the matter and demanded anonymity.

While nothing has been concretely decided, U.S. officials said President Barack Obama was leaning closer toward signing off on sending weapons to vetted, moderate rebel units. The U.S. has spoken of possibly arming the opposition in recent months but has been hesitant because it doesn't want to al-Qaida-linked and other extremists fighting alongside the anti-Assad militias to end up with the weapons.

MORE...

http://www.newser.com/article/da6qiv280/ap-sources-us-leaning-toward-ok-on-lethal-aid-to-syrian-rebels-this-week-no-fly-zone-unclear.html

[Rosa Luxemburg]

1. Why are we even getting involved in this?

People are starving in Africa and no one worries.

[Purveyor]

2. A decent 'dust up' in the ME would take the headlines off all the other shit going on...perhaps? nt

[kenny blankenship]

7. To get at Iran

basically, that's what it boils down to. Without Syria on the chessboard, Iran becomes much more isolated in the region and Hezbollah is cut off from lines of support from Iran via Syria, that is if we can control the gory chaos that will follow the end of the Assad regime in Syria, or just make it gory enough that nothing at all can move in or out of there on the way to Lebanon. Do we care about unleashing further hurricanes of bloodshed in pursuit of this goal? No, we do not.

It's all about Iran - and, well, folks who hate Iran so much they are happy to aid Al Qaeda.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

12. more oil

[The Link]

3. The Susan Rice effect.

She is a hawk.

[roamer65]

4. Hmmm...I thought Al-Qaeda was the enemy.

I guess we're at war with Eastasia now, not Eurasia.

[magellan]

5. Fuck

More money we can't afford wasted on a fight that will only earn us more enemies.

Gotta keep feeding the surveillance state.

[Recursion]

6. Oy

What could go wrong?

[David__77]

8. The war party has been trying to bully Obama into this for a long time.

This is just one of their tactics - "leaking" such allegations. If Obama does indeed decide to provide arms to the pro-al Qaeda terrorists, it will have a devastating impact on this nation's security, and his own political fortunes. I sincerely hope that he continues to hold out against the warmonger elite. The people do not want this intervention, that's for sure.

[Purveyor]

9. If the President steps over this threshold, Iran will be next... eom

[David__77]

11. So much more could be gained, for less, by sitting in negotiation.

Instead, there is an apparent desire by some to return to the days of the cold war. We had our former secretary of state, Clinton, fretting about "re-Sovietization" of former Soviet countries, and itching for arming the Syrian insurgents. She is gone, but her faction remains.

In the 1980s, the Democratic Party, including John Kerry, had a much better orientation than the party today, as regards foreign affairs. The Democrats stood up against the Reagan administration's arming of the Nicaraguan contras. I fear that today, the contras would be lauded as "human rights" heroes.

In Syria, the government, the NCC, all the Kurdish groups, are willing and ready to sit down. If there could be UN-supervised elections, would this not be a victory? But the external opposition will have none of this without arms from abroad and total surrender by their enemy.

I HOPE that the chatter about arms is merely a means to goad the external opposition into agreeing to attend the "Geneva II" talks. Upon reflection, I personally think this scenario is more likely than Obama putting his name on weapons bound for Syrian insurgents in a strategic alliance with al Qaeda. Talk about (legitimate) fodder for the Rand Paul/Tea Party GOP faction...

[MrSlayer]

10. Bad, bad, bad, bad, bad idea.

We shouldn't be involved at all let alone arming these dickheads. Quite frankly, considering how poorly the other interventions went, we should be backing Assad. Stick with the dictator you know over these others that will surely go Sharia should they win.