Free Syrian Army FSA Are Bad Actors

              Obama Refuses to call the 'Fight' with IS as a 'War'?                                   

It seems the only difference between the terrorists groups is that the moderate FSA, Free Syrian Army only wants to put a bullet in your head while the extremist IS, Islamic State only wants to behead you. Obama vetted these FSA soldiers and has supplied weapons. Obama calls FSA terrorists "Rebels". I call them "Murderers!"  Read on... Time to Face the Real Facts and Call it a War! 

Obama Has FSA Fight For Our U.S. Forces?

"The Obama administration has delivered weapons, supplies, and CIA-sponsored training to the Free Syrian Army. United States intelligence analysts estimate that the U.S. has had a hand in training as many as 20,000 FSA rebels. The U.S. reportedly provided the FSA with weapons such as rockets and TOW anti-tank missiles, which were supplied through back-channels in Qatar and Saudi Arabia.

"The Free Syrian Army originally formed in July, 2011, at the start of the Syrian civil war. The group was initially composed largely of defectors from Bashar al-Assad’s Syrian Armed Forces.

"Recent reports coming out of eastern Syria Monday revealed that several factions within the Syrian opposition force known as the Free Syrian Army (FSA) have pledged services to the Islamic State, the group formerly known as the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS). Sources and eyewitnesses said that the FSA has handed over its weapons to the Islamic State in large numbers.

"The Free Syrian Army (FSA)" was said to be a “moderate” and “secular” force, which was used as the rationale by U.S. officials to supply the opposition force with weapons and training.

"Sources told Homs, Syria-based Zaman Alwasl newspaper that several factions within the FSA, including Ahl Al Athar, Ibin al-Qa’im, and Aisha have pledged to support the Islamic State."

On Tuesday, July 8, 2014 a spokesman for the Free Syrian Army said all of the area between Deir Ez-Zor, Syria, and the Iraqi border - a 90 mile stretch - has fallen to the Islamic State. The spokesman said that they not only controlled the territory, but had also taken over six Syrian oil and gas fields, along with a major pumping station that delivers oil to both Iraq and Syria. One of the captured oil fields included the al-Omar field, capable of producing 75,000 barrels of oil per day.

In a video proclamation, leaders in the town of al-Sahil said they “decided to swear allegiance” to the Islamic State and its leader: Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. 

Shouldn't the U.S. itself go fight on its own terms in combat?

Obama Riding Ass Backward on a Camel Hump

It is really ironic that in today's world the United States is precipitously falling further behind other world cultures.  As a leading nation founded upon Judeo-Christian values, many citizens have elected not to embrace any of these core national religious beliefs under the guise to maintain a ubiquitous religious freedom for all. As we proceed further towards attaining this noble utopian ideal we are losing the essence of our own national identity which is especially critical now if we are to survive past the twenty-first century. In looking down road for the guideposts ahead pointing to our future there are signposts that come up that take other nations in divergent directions. Which way is best?  Or, which way is better?  

On December 16, 2013 Saudi Prince Turkl al-Faisal criticized the Obama interim six-month moratorium accord introduced at the World Policy Conference in Monaco that attempts to ensure Tehran won't develop atomic bombs. The Prince further accused the Obama White House of blindsiding Riyadh with its overtures to Iran, Saudia Arabia's primary adversary, by not notifying them about 'secret talks' since last March, 2013 in neighboring Oman. And so now, why did I mention in the beginning about our U.S. Judeo-Christian founding values? It is because they are tremendously significant to our country's core identity around the world which transcends any domestic secular denials of their practice in our governance due to the separation of church and state. By itself, it is the reason there is so much dissention in the middle East now. 

To appreciate the regional dynamics one must understand some basics. Saudi Arabia and other Sunni Gulf nations are supporting the Sunni-dominated rebels in ANTI-JESUS IS NO GOD BANNER hangs over the 2nd Station of the Cross, Via Dolorosa - Old Jerusalem, Israel.Syria, while Shiite Iran is supporting the Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Syrian regime of President Bashar al-Assad, which is dominated by Alawites, an offshoot of Shiite Islam. Furthermore, in 1978 Saudia Arabia executed militant Alawite attackers trying to overthrow the House of Saud and take over the Holy City of Mecca and then deported the rest to Europe and elsewhere - no love lost today either. [statistically, 1.6 Bil. Muslims are 80% Sunni and 20% Shiite] All Muslims view the U.S. as an interloper and infidel nation of Christian non-believers to be conquered - the 'big Satan'. With some of these 'ground rules' under your belt now you can go further on in understanding this tangled conundrum of religious Islamic zealotry.         

I believe it is best to look at what is better within sovereign boundaries. A good fence makes good neighbors really applies in this spiritual debate. Why? Because in my analysis of the middle East countries, the twentieth century opened to WW1 retribution with European colonial plots and American interests deciding over permanent postwar territorial divisions without regard to indigenous tribal and religious factions considerations to form territorial borders. It created all the anguish and turmoil we see today in that whole region.

The truth now is that we still painfully have not learned from our mistakes. Past history proves to the Obama administration and others on how bad Progressive Democrat, President Woodrow Wilson botched it all at the 1919 Paris Peace Conference. Wilson's odd proclivity of enumerating problems such as his "the fourteen points," apparently being a lofty Princeton College President and Professor, it was his scholastic collegiate approach to framing problems and it was considered way too simplistic by many. It was backroom joke fodder bantered about, then, by Washington politician insiders.

"Woodrow Wilson's grand vision of a new world order rested on a bedrock of profound ignorance. Wilson surrounded himself with 'a staff of advisors,' experts on European economics, geography and ethnicity that included a specialist in Latin American studies, an American Indian historian, a scholar on the Crusades and two Persian linguistics professors." [it was noted, no experts were familiar with the middle East region since the U.S. hadn't gone to war with Turkey] "Despite his staff's size and unquestioned expertise, [albeit, not impressive if 'understanding territorial aspirations', which country wants whose land is an important consideration] Wilson’s selection of the membership of the delegation had assured further future criticism and turmoil since a failure to include any senators or current Republican leaders in the group clearly undercut support for the venture. His thinking on this matter is hard to fathom, especially in light of the outcome of the congressional elections in November 1918. The Republicans had gained a narrow majority in the Senate and Wilson would need the support of his political opponents in order to achieve the necessary two-thirds vote of that body for ratification of a treaty". [looks eerily like the Obama play-book 100 years later]

 And you want to wonder why our Diplomatic Relations are so screwed up?