I figured you’d be a fan of Libya’s destruction, after all Gadaffi was fighting Al Qeada who were backed by NATO.
The UK Parliament just confirmed what the alternative media has been saying for years. Specifically, a new report from…www.zerohedge.com
It’s a similar situation in Syria. The U.S, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, fund, arm and train terrorists, the media ignores it and howls about the casualties Assad causes. We’re meant to be killing terrorists not destroying governments and infrastructure to create a power vacuum that can only be filled by the strongest opposition, Al Qeada/ISIS.
“Alternatively, the United States could have convinced Russia that propping up Assad would be too costly. Establishing a no-fly zone before Russia intervened could have done that. Providing rebels with shoulder-mounted surface-to-air missiles might have as well.”
Back to my second question from earlier. Admittedly you did continue to say it wasn’t a great idea that could lead to U.S losses but ya still said it. You had to wriggle out of answering it because there are no moderate rebels. Also, how’d that no-fly zone work out in Libya? I heard the vultures did well.
I’m sure your work is well received amongst Al Qeada apologists. I am not one.