Arms in Iraq

Robert Tyler is keeping an eye on the Middle East for the Backbencher:

About this time last year the US, UK and French governments were looking into the possibility of offering support to rebel groups in Syria. I made my opposition very clear on this Blog and many others. My opposition was on the basis that we did not know who we would be arming and I made the claim, as did many others, that weapons or support would only play to the favour of Al Qaeda or other Islamist groups in the country.

The events of last week have clearly shown that my fears were not unfounded. Last week ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria), one of the largest rebel groups in Syria, captured Mosul, Iraq’s Second City. They forced people from their homes and began to attack the ‘legitimate’ government of Iraq. They’ve captured Turkish Diplomats and have begun to institute Sharia Law in the area.

Not only have they done that but they have also ceased a large number of weapons from the Iraqi army, many of them US made. This now means that ISIS has access to some of the most advanced weaponry being used in the Middle East today.

This has made two things clear: The first being that had we given the so called ‘Good Rebels’ weapons last year they would have ended up in the hands of the Islamists.

This consensus at this blog, as we made clear on James Snell’s contrarian thread, was not to intervene in Syria. According to Tyler we were proved right.

Tyler goes on to anticipate a further threat to the Kurds, and although I don’t feel qualified to give an opinion on that prediction, it makes for a tense read. Read the whole thing.

Simon Gibbs

Simon is a London based IT contractor and the proprietor of Libertarian Home. Working with logic and cause-and-effect each day he was naturally attracted to nerdy libertarianism and later to harshly logical Objectivism. Find him on Google+ 

Tags:

  1 comment for “Arms in Iraq

  1. Jun 13, 2014 at 1:00 pm

    I always found this clip of Dick Cheney from 1994 very interesting, insofar as he was right back then, but somehow managed to forget everything he knew by the time he was back in power under Bush 2:

Comments are closed.